User talk:Durova/Archive 62

Soju and commercial images

Hello, Durova, I come to here to ask your help regarding image policies since you're an admins at Commons and your expertise are lied on there. I believe Image:Soju jinro gfdl.jpg is a fair use image even if it which looks seemingly taken by a professional photographer is released by the user. So I think it should be only used for Jinro, the maker and for the specific item. According to the page at Commons, some user transferred from English Wikipedia and the photographer is "Geoff Martin". I just want to clarify the copyright status and how far I can use the image within Wikipedia. Thanks.--Caspian blue (talk) 02:21, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

The uploader probably didn't realize this is a derivative work; the manufacturer owns a copyright on the label. Transwiki to English Wikipedia, request speedy deletion from Commons as copyvio, and use only at the article about that particular brand. Remove GDFL and "Geoff Martin" copyright claim; relabel as copyright fair use and write a nonfree media use rationale. Thank you very much for asking. :) Durova^Charge! 03:40, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice and opinion on it. I think I might face a strong resistance from editors if I remove it from soju because the brand dominates South Korean soju (a type of distilled drink) market. I already faced such problem yesterday on a minor article. If you have a time, could you look into this gallery page? commons:Korean_alcoholic_beverages I think some of them are on the verge of "fair use" and "acceptable usage as CC-BY(-SA)". Could you do me a favor one more time? Thanks.--Caspian blue (talk) 19:54, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Storming of the Bastille

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Storming the bastille 4.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. jjron (talk) 08:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 08:58, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you!

WikiThanks

Thank you for donating your time on behalf of women's rights! Next thing you know, we'll be demanding the vote! :) Awadewit (talk) 16:55, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. :) Durova^Charge! 17:03, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Agapetos angel

Hi. Thank you for your efforts to improve ethics at Wikipedia. I brought up Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Agapetos angel at http://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=Ethical_Management_of_the_English_Language_Wikipedia/Moulton,_JWSchmidt%27s_investigation&diff=316468&oldid=316345 . We would love for you to come to our ethics project and add whatever you wish to add. Wikiversity is different from WikiPedia. At wikiversity, there is no 3 revert rule, original research is allowed, and multiple pages presenting different points of view are allowed. But claims should still be backed with evidence. Thanks again. I hope you care to share with us some of your experience and insight. WAS 4.250 (talk) 20:52, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. It's a pleasant surprise to get a message about that old case. Durova^Charge! 20:50, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the invitation. Existing commitments are taking up too much time to branch out in that area. If I may give a slight correction to that summary, I wasn't the one who took that case to ArbCom. I had done some dispute resolution prior to arbitration and given out a barnstar to the editors at a related article. Since my attempt at mediation was cited at RFAR, I got pulled into the case a little bit (although I wasn't a named party). Best regards, Durova^Charge! 21:03, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the correction. Perhaps at some other time you will grace us with your presence there. Take care. WAS 4.250 (talk) 21:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, let's just say I don't have the best working relationship with some of the contributors there. I wish you well, but can barely keep up with the tugging at my sleeves that I already get. Best, Durova^Charge! 22:02, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

NY 74

Per MoS, images can't be left-aligned directly under directly below subsection-level headings, and as the legislative picture was in the way of right-aligning the road sign image, I removed it, as it seems the least relevant. Feel free to revert, though. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 21:20, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

It's okay I guess. I was hoping to give the article some historic color. That sort of flavor is usually lacking in roads articles. Durova^Charge! 21:27, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, that is indeed true. Is this any better? –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 21:30, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks fine by me. :) Durova^Charge! 21:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Certainly; I'd be more than happy to help with any questions/requests. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 13:24, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Navajo man photo

Have you seen the comment at Image talk:Zahadolzhá--Navaho.jpg? I was about to schedule this for POTD but on the assumption that the comment is sincere (and true), it seems like it would culturally insensitive to put this on the Main Page. What do you think? Or do you think you can possibly investigate this some? howcheng {chat} 04:13, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for asking; I hadn't noticed that note either. Not sure what to make of it so I've left a note asking for advice. Best regards, Durova^Charge! 06:39, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Ambrose Everett Burnside.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on September 9, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-09-09. howcheng {chat} 04:31, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you as always. :) Durova^Charge! 06:41, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your effort

I wish I'd known you were going back to the original .tif or I'd have offered the interim file sooner. Totally understand how time sets constraints. It's often possible to approach a restoration from more than one valid perspective. Thanks for your work; we'll see how people respond. All the best, Durova^Charge! 01:32, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Hehe, next time, I'll ask :) I never imagined that you kept the interim versions as separate files. That's good to know. I normally like your restorations 100%, but this one just looked kind of whitewashed on my monitor and the background was distracting, but I think my monitor is calibrated on the bright side. Kaldari (talk) 14:44, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

New Volcano FPC

Can you please comment at this FPC? It is another high quality image of a volcano erupting. Cheers, —Sunday ^Scribe 00:16, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks like it's already getting responses. Durova^Charge! 10:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Guano

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:DefecatingSeagull.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. jjron (talk) 08:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

PS: time for a new talkpage archive? --jjron (talk) 08:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

thank you :) Durova^Charge! 10:22, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Cute crochet animals

Hey Durova,

In the latest issue of Woman's Day, there are some crochet patterns for cute animals. I saw them and thought of you; I'm sure they wouldn't take you long to make, although perhaps they're not your thing? I started on the super-cute turtle myself; the pattern is easy enough for a knitter, and kind of cheery. :) Willow (talk) 11:49, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much WillowW! Durova^Charge! 18:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

An idea

A comment from TheBainer at RFAR regarding the Sarah Palin wheel war brought something to mind: he wondered what percentage of the vandalism at that article was coming from non-autoconfirmed editors. At a sufficiently high traffic article it may be possible to estimate that kind of data by bot. I'm thinking not so much to get hard and fast details on the Sarah Palin vandalism, but as a tool to help admins gauge whether to apply semiprotection at BLPs that get a sudden flood of traffic due to real world news. Might help simplify consensus and avoid future wheel wars. If an article gets a minimum threshold of edits within a span of time (perhaps 100 edits in 24 hours), the tool would track bot-reverted vandalism edits and the edit summaries for manual reversions (which would give a rough estimate of who's doing the vandalism), then check to see what percentage of the editors whose contributions had been reverted as vandalism were IPs and non-autoconfirmed users. Don't know whether you have time for this, but you've got a reputation for being good with coding and good with statistical data. Does this sound feasible? Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 04:58, 5 September 2008

Yes we can do a quick statistical look by doing several toolserver queries. DO you have anything specific we should look for? Basically I'm just going to run a count of how many anons and anon editors were reverted. Is there anything more to this? Has an arbitrator asked for anything more specific? I'll be around later today, probably after 2 PM EST.

P.S. Does your request stem from: Note that should this case be accepted, one useful avenue of inquiry for those submitting evidence would be to look into the sources of vandalism to the article, particularly the proportions of vandalism coming from IP editors and non-autoconfirmed accounts on the one hand, and autoconfirmed accounts on the other. I note that some of our more statistically minded editors have taken interest in this request so far, perhaps they would like to assist in this regard. --bainer (talk) 00:21, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, P.S.S. I'm not likely to check back on this page, as such, please post back on my talk page. If you like, you can copy the conversation over as I did to keep it together. —— nixeagle 14:01, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your swift reply. Let's approach Bainer and see what his ideas are. If we count all reversions then we'll doubtless get a few edits that are POV differences rather than vandal reverts. Yet if we rely on bots, rollback, and "rvv" summaries we'll probably get an undercount. Ideally we might find someone who has enough grounding in statistics to calculate statistical significance thresholds and margins of error. Durova^Charge! 18:38, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Mmm, alright come back to me when you have a plan for how to do the analysis. As far as overcount and undercount, the best way to do that would probably be to simply show both numbers. I don't think a high degree of precision is required, we are just looking to see if there are alot of anon vandals or not compared to the rest of the article. We could then compare our numbers to some other articles and get an idea of what is "normal" and what is very high. Ie, we could run the same test and get results from a featured articles while they are on the front page to get some datapoints.

What I need to know specifically is what to look for. What numbers do we want? My guess would be both numbers above (all reverts, all reverts the tool thinks is vandalism, total edits in the time period, anything else?) What is listed there I can pull up with a few mysql queries on toolserver. Again I think the most important thing to do is to do the tests on several articles so we have an idea of how to interpret the results. If you have some suggestions for test pages tell me. I'd think a few "today's featured article"s would do well in this regard along with a few articles which have been protected because of anon vandalism and a few that have no vandalism at all. —— nixeagle 19:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

P.S. Again, reply on my talk page. Thanks —— nixeagle 19:11, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

FPC??

A wikipenny for your thoughts on Image:AmericanMarramGrassKohlerAndraeStateParkLakeMichigan.jpg - is it a good idea to nominate this for FP or wouldn't you? Please don't spend much time on it. Royalbroil 18:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

One of the first things I do with this type of image is check the file size data. This one reads as follows: 2,304 × 1,728 pixels, file size: 686 KB, MIME type: image/jpeg. Whenever a file has dimensions that large, but a file size less than 1 MB, it's pretty heavily compressed. And it may look fantastic in thumbnail but the FPC regulars are likely to turn it down. There are two ways to work around that. If it's sourced to an online archive, check out the original file. Could be, the uploader compressed it and you can upload the original uncompressed version. If a Wikimedian took the photograph, you could contact them and request a higher resolution shot. If they have one, fantastic. Even if not, it's got to put a smile on the editor's face to see that someone thought their work might be good enough to get featured. Best, Durova^Charge! 19:12, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your honesty! I took the picture and that's the original. My photos are usually more in the 800-900 kb range, so this one must have been compressed more than normal. I'll get a better camera some day. I did see a major quality difference when I borrowed my brother's awesome expensive camera once. I won't spend any more time thinking about FPC, at least until I spend money to buy a better camera. I do need a new camera, as my camera consistently shows dots when I take a picture of a light blue cloudy or hazy sky. It works correctly with any other color. I want a camera that can take better shots of high speed auto racing while zoomed more. I've read a photography book so that I understand what manual settings and options I need to have to get better shots (once I want to spend the money). Royalbroil 19:36, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Try checking your presets when you save photographs. A lot of people don't realize their software defaults to a compressed .jpg. On good photos you may want to reuse, I recommend saving to .tif format (which is lossless) and when you convert to .jpg for upload make sure you select maximum file size. Also, convert to .jpg as the very last step before uploading in order to minimize artifacting (.jpg overwrites itself and degrades, unless you burn to DVD). Best, Durova^Charge! 19:45, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again for the advice. I learned about lossy jpegs, artifacts, advice on converting long term storage to TIFF files, etc. not long ago when I got a degree in Information Technology. My camera is a relatively inexpensive Kodak EasyShare C330 pocket-sized model. It has very limited options and none on file format. Images are set at the maximum number of pixels (4.0 MP). I think I'm pushing my current camera as far as I can. About the only manual adjustments available is ISO. I always avoid digital zooming and stay with optical zooms. I'll get a DSLR camera with my next one and things will improve. Royalbroil 20:07, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Your comment at RFAR about number crunching

Prompted me to talk to Nixeagle about creating a tool that could help determine whether full protection or semiprotection would be more useful at high traffic articles. Please join our conversation at User_talk:Nixeagle#An_idea. It might help prevent future flareups like the recent wheel war. Durova^Charge! 18:42, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

For starters I suggested comparing rev_len on revisions in order to identify reverts. --bainer (talk) 02:36, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Featured Sound Promotion

All these were promoted:

Ludwig van Beethoven's Piano Sonata No. 28 in A major, Op. 101. Performed by Daniel Veesey from Musopen.com.

See also: Beethoven's original sketch of the fourth movement.

Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 08:27, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! :) Durova^Charge! 08:30, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Cowardly Lion

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Cowardly lion2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. jjron (talk) 13:26, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 16:43, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:MarsPanoramaa.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on September 12, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-09-12. howcheng {chat} 18:36, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much, as always. :) Durova^Charge! 22:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

New York Routes project tags

I see you've been doing quite a bit of work retagging NY route articles. Would you like some help with that? Cheers, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 22:44, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Nearly done, actually. If you could help with content work I'd be delighted. :) At the moment just wrapping up the last of these and getting to work on a restoration for the Finger Lakes portal drive. Best, Durova^Charge! 22:48, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Actually, something comes to mind. I'd like to use more excerpts from that 1839 map of New York highways where it's appropriate. If it's possible to get a list of the highways whose histories go back that far, I could do the edits and insertions at one fell swoop. That might help a variety of them and would save a lot of time to do the image editing as a batch. Best, Durova^Charge! 00:13, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I'm not sure if it would be possible to get a comprehensive list of such highways, but I could certainly find quite a few. Come to think of it, most state highways were once turnpikes that were alive during that time period, so it shouldn't be hard. This book should be a good starting point. I'll try to throw together a list in due time. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 00:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. A batch of about a dozen or so would be great for starters. The Finger Lakes portal drive relates to the New York roads project, so I'm restoring images with an eye toward helping the portal get featured. Best, Durova^Charge! 00:38, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

User:Juliancolton/NY routes is what I made off the top of my head. As for the Finger Lakes portal, I'd be happy to help with that, as well. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 00:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Looks great! Cirt's leading the portal drive, so ask him if it needs anything. Durova^Charge! 01:01, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Wawona Tree

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Wawona tree1.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. jjron (talk) 08:43, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 08:47, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ludwig van Beethoven

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Beethoven death mask4.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. jjron (talk) 08:48, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Now we have a full set of featured media for Beethoven. :) Durova^Charge! 08:52, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Cirt

Durova, please explain to me how specific knowledge of Cirt's previous identities would be harmful. Obviously I know them. Please feel free to respond to by email. I have not yet decided what, if any action, I will take on this but I feel that full disclosure of Cirt's previous identities is important as s/he continues to edit the same articles and is not without blemish in her current incarnation. Thanks. I look forward to your prompt reply as I will want to post in the RfA soon. Please be specific in your reply or ask Cirt to reply as I am far from convinced given what you have already provided (associate harassed at work or some such - I don't see how that is applicable especially as if I know the previous IDs then it can be assumed that other interested parties do, especially as I have mentioned them on a number of occasions here.) --Justallofthem (talk) 20:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I think that's sufficiently explained in my answer to Athenara. Do you have specific concerns beyond that? Durova^Charge! 20:54, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I do. So Editor X collaborated with someone. What does that mean? Did they share the Editor X account or did they have separate account but knew each others IRL identity? --Justallofthem (talk) 22:24, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

I have no reason to suppose they operated any role account or otherwise behaved improperly. Wikipedia is a collaborative project and editors work collaboratively whenever they edit the same articles (or at least they try to work in a collaborative spirit). Best, Durova^Charge!

I am trying to understand the specifics of the alleged privacy concern. I did not accuse Cirt of any wrongdoing though I have reason to believe that she did use the prior account in a collaborative manner. Are you willing to explain the concern or do we have to take your word for it? Because I am having a problem seeing just what the concern here is. --Justallofthem (talk) 00:49, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, there are limits to what I'm at liberty to discuss. It's my longstanding belief that ethical decisions where good people disagree belong in the hands of the individuals who live with the consequences. I'd certainly understand if you felt the need to oppose (reasonable adults can disagree respectfully). You may contact Jimbo for confirmaton that a concern existed. Durova^Charge! 01:05, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

I am willing...

... to learn how the data I posted carry a security concern. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 21:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Please refer to my post to Athenara. Durova^Charge! 21:27, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Link? ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 21:31, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cirt Durova^Charge! 21:35, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I saw that now. As for the request to delete my comments from the article history, I have to admit I have not done that in a long time. Would you do it, please? ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 21:37, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Never mind User:WBOSITG is already at it. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 21:38, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

These edits have been deleted, but I leave it to you to delete your comments, as I do not know if that all what you wanted. ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 21:41, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

(ec, still seems relevant) Yes. :) I really would rather not have drama here (and probably neither would you). If you'd like to do some mutual refactors/strikethroughs, I'll gladly follow yours with my share. Respectfully, Durova^Charge! 21:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Help me out here, Durova. What do I need to refactor? ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 21:44, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Can I now remove your comments? Or there is anything else that displeases you? ≈ jossi ≈ (talk) 22:04, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

looking at the page (we'll sort this out) Durova^Charge! 22:05, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay, my share is gone. I'll leave yours to your discretion. Durova^Charge! 22:07, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

Cute title

As a somewhat misgiven participant on some of the relevant pages needing a refresher, I wanted to just let you know I appreciated your latest blog thread title. Keep up the good punmanship ;-) Baccyak4H (Yak!) 18:30, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll do my best. :) Durova^Charge! 23:56, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Clarification needed

Maybe you could clarify whether your !vote at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Pigs July 2008-1.jpg is a real support vote, as the condition you placed is unlikely to be met and seems mostly humorous. There has been no activity on the discussion for three days, and your clarification may enable the nom to be closed. Thank you. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 08:34, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Unlikely to be possible to meet either, unless pigs grow opposable thumbs (I hear tell they occasionally grow wings). Thanks for asking; I've clarified at the discussion. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 08:39, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Propaganda of the Spanish American War

File:Shooting Captured Insurgents - Spanish-American War.ogg

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Shooting Captured Insurgents - Spanish-American War.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. jjron (talk) 09:46, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. :) Durova^Charge! 09:55, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:AN re:Privatemusings

Your post on AN (Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Motion_to_close) and extension of the Privatemusings mentorship is causing a bit of confusion. Clarify? - auburnpilot talk 23:16, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Handled. Durova^Charge! 01:17, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Heads up

Request for clarification - amendment Best, NonvocalScream (talk) 01:23, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Durova^Charge! 01:31, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Edit or crop?

Image:MSH82 st helens spirit lake reflection 05-19-82.jpg? Crop or edit. —Sunday ^Note 12:28, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, gorgeous. Both, actually: too much foreground and slightly unsharp. But don't waste time on that heavily compressed upload. There's a magnificent 48MB .tif at the original site. Great find! Best, Durova^Charge! 17:21, 13 September 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. Fir doesn't seem to agree. —§unday His Grandiloquence 02:31, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

What about this one? You like? —§unday His Grandiloquence 02:33, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I agree with his assessment. On the whole, his makes a better candidate. Be sure to have a look over the current FPs though. We've already got at least one about that volcano. Durova^Charge! 02:42, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Which one? —§unday His Grandiloquence 14:32, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

This has the clearest depiction of volcanic activity. Durova^Charge! 08:24, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Niagara falls Suspension Bridge

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Niagara rail 2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 04:41, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 05:17, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Sprang

This is nice. And the attractive layout and illustration seem familiar from other fabric articles. I have the feeling that this is because they are characteristic of your article writing? 86.44.16.18 (talk) 05:58, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. We had a few good images of completed sprang, but nothing that demonstrated the construction method. So I made one up on a lap frame. I've done that sort of work where needed for other textile articles. Some more ambitious examples are at smocking and bead crochet. Best, Durova^Charge! 06:41, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah yes. I also note the colourful Crochet thread and Stitch marker's colourful ref! 86.44.16.18 (talk) 07:29, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 07:45, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Annus Mirabilis Papers

Durova I was looking to see if you would help me with something. I'm a physics student in college and I was looking to find Einstein's original Annus Mirabilis Papers that revolutionized physics. However I'm unsure where that would fall under copyright policy. The papers were published in 1905 so would that be PD under the 100 year copyright policy? I'll try finding the original papers and post a link to where i got them from in case that is also important to the copyright of the papers. Thanks. Victorrocha (talk) 08:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Those papers were published in Annalen der Physik, which I believe falls under German copyright law? Einstein passed away in 1955, so under the life +70 rule those papers wouldn't have entered the public domain yet. Durova^Charge! 08:22, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks!

Durova, thanks for nominating Cirt for the mop, and for trying to fly ahead of some controversy that may, unfortunately, have been inevitable. I wish I'd noticed the nom -- Cirt has been incredibly helpful to us at WikiProject Oregon, and has exhibited the skills and temperament that make for an excellent admin. Hope all's well with you! -Pete (talk) 21:38, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you, Pete. I did my utmost to keep it a clean RFA and am very pleased the community chose to tust him. Most of all, though, it was Cirt's accomplishment. I don't know where he found the inspiration to go from edit warrior to sterling editor, but if I find that magic spring I'll be sure to bottle that stuff and share it. All the best, Durova^Charge! 21:50, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:49, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (166/43/7). I appreciate your comments and in my actions as an administrator I will endeavor to maintain the trust you have placed in me. I am honored by your trust and your support. -- Durova, thank you so very much for your kind words, your patience, your respect, and your wisdom. Thank you, Cirt (talk) 01:48, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

You earned it. May you use the tools well. Durova^Charge! 02:26, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

FS promotion

Congrats! Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 05:46, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. :) I'll have to get another one going. Durova^Charge! 16:04, 16 September 2008 (UTC)

Seer of All Things

It's the little things that count. How could you have possibly known? XF Law (talk) 00:03, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh dear...I was wondering if that would come up. Rofl... :) Durova^Charge! 00:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I felt obligated to bring it up. I'm off to P-chop a monkey's uncle and a three-dollar bill, just in case... XF Law (talk) 00:15, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Featured Sound

Congrats! Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 01:03, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 01:12, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Dispatch

The prose (example numbers) no longer make sense around the deleted image.[1] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:37, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Probably the latter image and the related text should be deleted also. There's been a change in Russian copyright law. Thank you for the heads up. Durova^Charge! 04:15, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

ah. Darn, that was a great example; thanks for fixing. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:34, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I hope someday we find another half as good. :) Best, Durova^Charge! 05:15, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Sprang

On 17 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sprang, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 03:15, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 04:12, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Sprang GAN

I have reviewed this article in accordance with the GA criteria, and have found it satisfactory. However, a few small adjustments and perhaps a slight expansion would greatly improve the articles chance of making it as a GA. Please see the talk page for my review. Thanks, --Jordan ^Contribs 14:08, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks; will do. :) Durova^Charge! 16:48, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I have cleared up some of my comments, and made some suggestions. I have transcluded the page here for greater ease of access. --Jordan ^Contribs 17:49, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Commented there about WP:LEADCITE and citing format examples. Cirt (talk) 22:45, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sprang/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

A good article, but a few improvements could be made. More references and inline citations would be great, especially in the lead section. NPOV: no problems here. The article is also stable. Though the article is short, it is concise. It sticks to the topic, while giving useful facts to keep the reader interested. All-in-all, a satisfactory article, yet one that will require some work before being passed as a GA. --Jordan ^Contribs 13:59, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi and thanks for the feedback. I checked with a couple of editors who have over 100 GAs between and was specifically recommended to avoid citations in the lead--as long as the information is cited in the main body of the article. That's what I believe I've done here, although any specific omissions I'd be glad to address immediately (after reading the same paragraph 20 times it gets tricky to spot these things on one's own). Regarding the rest, I've been a little old fashioned I guess in that I've followed the convention that if sentences 1, 2, and 3 of a paragraph all derive from the same source then one puts the citation at the end of sentence 3. Over at FAC some of the editors have taken to citing every single sentence despite the redundancy. Is that what you want here? Every line is already sourced--the only difference is what convention. Thank you again for your review and please clarify. Best, Durova^Charge! 16:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I was not aware of the "citations in the lead section" point. I think I might have to brush up on my knowledge of the finer points of the manual of style. If the reference style is fine, then you need not worry. The information is thoroughly referenced, and all the sources are valid.It's a shame there is no online resource provided for World Textiles: A Visual Guide to Traditional by John Gillow and Bryan Sentance. I looked for a PDF file, but was unable to find one. I would have been quite interested to look into that.

• There is just one sentence I would like you to clarify: it seems a bit jumbled. "Fiber manipulation is done with the fibers with the fingers, also using one or more rods to prevent unraveling." If you could fix the sentence a bit? Thanks, --Jordan ^Contribs 17:37, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

It's a beautiful book if you happen to find it, and pretty good for filling in some of the gaps and expanding the substubs in our textile arts articles. I'll see what else I can do to clarify the technique section. It's the sort of area where someone who knows the field and is experienced with related media gets to a certain point and thinks Aha! I see how they did this and it's obvious why it's nearly obsolete. Created the demonstration on the loom to help convey that, but you're very right--the text itself could do better. I'll be right on that in a few hours. Thanks again. Durova^Charge! 18:43, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

The relevant info regarding the lead/intro is at WP:LEADCITE. Generally if the same info is cited to WP:RS/WP:V sources later in the body of the article, it is redundant and unnecessary to cite the same info in the lead. Cirt (talk) 21:38, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

See the WP:FA The General in His Labyrinth for an example of a nice way to cite using "notes", and then include the full reference in a references section. This article is shorter so it would be easier to reformat it that way. Cirt (talk) 21:41, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Expansion

Have obtained a copy of 'The Techniques of Sprang' by Peter Collingwood, which is the definitive reference work on this topic and (sadly) is long out of print and used booksellers charge an arm and a leg for it. Will be expanding the article with information primarily from Collingwood. Citations will follow. Skrydstrup (talk) 17:56, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

A New Voice Enters, Sept 2017

I also have and study the Collingwood book, and am also a student of modern Sprang scholar and technique revivalist Carol James, whose works on sprang are in print: RuTemple (talk) 01:15, 13 September 2017 (UTC) I would like to clarify and add some information to the Sprang article, and append a draft as follows:

During the late Eighteenth and early Nineteenth Centuries a military fashion of decorative sprang sashes in silk known as faja in Spain gained international popularity among ranking military and distinguished civilians, the fashion spreading to northern Europe and to North America. A sprang sash worn baldrick style diagonally across from the shoulder was a distinguishing ornament of rank on the battlefield. Major General Edward Braddock was carried mortally wounded from the battlefield on his sprang sash as a stretcher, and was said to have passed this sash to George Washington who kept and used it for the remainder of his life. The red silk Braddock Sash is held at George Washington’s Mount Vernon, and has been replicated for the museum by modern sprang scholar and artist Carol James.

Some of my questions include whether video and website references may be used in citation. If no, Carol's article may well suffice, as it includes snippets of her recreation-in-progress at the time of the Braddock Sash for Mount Vernon (photos in the article of the work in red silk).

There is, notably, a pre-Columbian sprang shirt found in Arizona, dated 700 - 1200 C.E., held by the Arizona State Museum, and whose commissioned reproduction is detailed in articles in PLY Magazine , and in Ms. James' keynote presentation to the Braids 2016 international conference (clearly this portion is not-yet-formatted sandboxing).

I'm a long-time technical, format and style, and pre-press editor of academic dissertations, and a fiber artist interested in complex braiding and narrow wares, and would like to bring this background to strengthening Wikipedia's textile coverage. I hope to collaborate and seek advice, and will now apply myself to a close perusal of the Wikipedia:Manual of Style.

RuTemple (talk) 00:04, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

User:Richard Rolles

Re his sockpuppet User:ShadowVsScientology - its well funny how the bloke commences to answering (and oh so vanilla) my recent talkpage edits just after I raised a Neutral with User:Cirt on her recent RfA. See Talk:Thunderbirds (TV series) for an e.g. Luv 17:31, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

I've been a bit concerned by that person's participation. Do you think he's reachable? I almost tried, but the username impressed me as someone who doesn't take this project seriously at all. Durova^Charge! 22:37, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Le trompeur trompé

On 17 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Le trompeur trompé , which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

All the Best, --Mifter (talk) 00:22, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 00:23, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Sprang

This article has passed its GA review, and has been listed as a "Arts and architecture" GA. Great job: keep up the good work. If you need anything else reviewed, just contact me on my talk page. I'll also see if I can get my hands on that book of textile art. It looks quite interesting. Cheers, --Jordan ^Contribs 07:49, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for all your help. :) Durova^Charge! 08:05, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Another FS

Your Featured sound candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured sound status, Image:Save a Little Dram for Me.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 08:45, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Can you fix up the description on WP:FS? It could use the full name of the composer, and the performer. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 08:45, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, pretty template! Puts featured sounds on a footing with the rest of featured content. I'll see what I can do about the description. Thanks again. :) Durova^Charge! 08:56, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:NYSR

Hi Durova. I don't know if you've kept up with the discussion at WT:USRD, but I know you and Mitch talked quite a bit about the splitting of NYSR from USRD. As NYSR has gained nothing from the split, yet lost access to USRD's luxuries and services, I proposed the projects be re-merged at WT:USRD and WT:NYSR. As I know you've discussed the matter with Mitch quite a bit, would you mind giving your opinion regarding the matter? Thanks, –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 21:06, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up. I'm really more interested in the content side of things. As you may have noticed, I haven't actually joined either project so I don't think it would be quite appropriate to vote on a project level issue right now. Best, Durova^Charge! 22:15, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:CUP

USA is free.  ;) weburiedoursecretsinthegarden 22:45, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh, ha. I just left RyRy the same message. (He told me on IRC that he wanted the USA). I guess first to get there gets it. ;) iMatthew (talk) 22:48, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

It's okay. I'll represent for Mexico. :) Durova^Charge! 23:04, 18 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ijazah

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Ijazah3.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 05:10, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 05:49, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Martial law in Galveston, 1900

On a FPT page you said "The city was under martial law at the time and law enforcement was shooting (with bullets) at people they caught taking pictures." Do you have a source for this? There is currently a discussion on Talk:Hurricane Ike about the ongoing media blackout in Galveston and this would provide some great historical perspective. Plasticup ^T/C 01:44, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

See the Library of Congress bibliographic data linked from the image upload page. It's noted there. Durova^Charge! 02:27, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

help please

how do i put forword may self to become an adminstraters because i cant work out how to add myself ono the page were you can become a hopeful

please help me! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chloe2kaii7 (talk • contribs) 10:39, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, the page where you'd do this is WP:RFA. I suggest you get more experience first. Durova^Charge! 17:05, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Editor review

Would you mind commenting at my editor review? —§unday {Q} 15:08, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

I usually like to work with an editor firsthand before forming an opinion about whether they're cut out for adminship. I know nothing negative about you, but then I haven't seen much of your work either. Durova^Charge! 17:20, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

State highways in Hamilton County, New York

On 20 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article State highways in Hamilton County, New York, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 19:26, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 19:36, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Re. Featured sound?

Hello Durova. Sure, I'll help in whatever I can. May I know what file is it? Regards, Húsönd 20:45, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Do you need me to translate the info in Portuguese? Regards, Húsönd 20:57, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

That'd help. :) Durova^Charge! 20:59, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Okay. I got some friends dropping in for coffee now, but I'll get back to it soon. Regards, Húsönd 21:31, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. :) Durova^Charge! 21:35, 20 September 2008 (UTC)

Here goes:

Note on author rights:

http://www.dominiopublico.gov.br/PoliticaDoAcervo/PoliticaDoAcervo.jsp

"The contents available for consultation on this website (http://www.dominiopublico.gov.br) are composed, in its majority, by works that belong to the public domain or works that carry the respective license by the holders of the pending authorial rights.

The recent change brought to the legislation that deals with authorial rights in Brazil (Law no. 9.610, of February 19, 1998; which voided Law no. 5.988, of December 14, 1973), which changed the period of validity of authorial rights; as well as the different legislations that regulate the authorial rights of other countries; brings some difficulties in the verification of the precise period after which a work is considered as within the public domain. The Public Domain portal has strived for no authorial rights to be violated. However, if a file is found as violating, for any reason, authorial rights of translation, version, exhibition, reproduction, or any others, click here and inform the Public Domain portal team so that the situation may be immediately regularized".

I hope this helps. :-) If more assistance is needed, you know how to reach me. Regards, Húsönd 00:59, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

I've searched the website and could not find any information on where exactly took place the performance (yet it most likely was in Belo Horizonte). No exact date is provided, but it occurred in 1999. I think I might send them an e-mail tomorrow and ask the needed info. Regards, Húsönd 03:09, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Red Jacket

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Red Jacket 2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 07:32, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 07:41, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

Lipstick on a pig

I think it would be better if someone went to their local pig farm, put a heavy coat of lipstick on a pig, and took a picture. The photoshopping looks, well, eye-rollingly amateur (as you point out, intentionally so). Still, it hardly matters. I just put my two cents in there. Don't really care one way or another at the end of the day. ScienceApologist (talk) 14:56, 22 September 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 23 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article I Want to Go Back to Michigan, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Jordan ^Contribs 12:19, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 17:31, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

USDA/PD

You are the resident expert on US government PD images - do you think images on this website http://www.whitemoldresearch.com/ which is run by the USDA (Agricultural Research Service) are PD? Was hoping to use one or more in an article about sclerotinia. Viridae^Talk 05:52, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

I get this from their home page: This consortium of federal and state university scientists includes 10 land grant universities and five crop commodity groups, and is led by the Agricultural Research Service, the USDA’s chief scientific research agency. Suggest you contact them and ask whether their federal funding arrangement requires that their work be public domain. Durova^Charge!

RfBan

As I admit, I was not active during CSN's days and based on the general knee-jerk reactions of people, have tried to distance my idea from it. I have researched it in detail and since you asked, presented the details in a chart at User_talk:MBisanz/RfBan#CSN.3F. Since you did have a great deal of experience with CSN and do have experience in AN/ANI/etc, I would appreciate any help you could give in forming this concept. MBisanz ^talk 15:54, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. :) I'll have a look there soon. Durova^Charge! 16:35, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Segregation FP

An African American man climbs stairs to a theater's "colored" entrance, Mississippi, 1939. The door on the ground level is marked "white men only".

I too had looked for good (well, high-quality) images of segregation in the United States before and hadn't found much. Today though I went hunting again and came across this. What do you think? It needs perspective correction (if we're in the business of doing that with historic photos), but otherwise is in good shape. Does wikipedia have room for two FPs of this subject? Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:10, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

If this one is used to illustrate an article on the history of cinema in the United States, it could be a good candidate. Perspective correction isn't my strong point. I'd suggest working from the full 30MB file with a bit of clockwise rotation and cropping, then uploading without compression. Best, Durova^Charge! 22:29, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

CfD nomination of Category:Songs by Shelton Brooks

I have nominated Category:Songs by Shelton Brooks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for renaming to Category:Songs written by Shelton Brooks (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at the discussion page. Thank you. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 23:41, 24 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your help and apologies for any trouble it caused. I've been cleaning up the chaos of early twentieth century popular music and filled in some existing redlinks. Hadn't realized those were incorrectly named (more attention went into extracting large numbers of copyvios). The articles had been cited to Angelfire, MySpace, and even Boy Scout Troop 92--the source looked like it had been constructed by someone who was trying to earn a merit badge. So it shouldn't be surprising that the articles were also noncompliant with MOS. Sorry I didn't think of it myself. Best, Durova^Charge! 00:06, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Galveston, Texas after the Hurricane of 1900

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Searching for bodies, Galveston 1900.ogv, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 06:48, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Gerald Ford hearing2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 06:54, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 08:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

DYK

On 26 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Huletts Landing, New York, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Jordan ^Contribs 08:06, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Durova^Charge! 08:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Wu Tingfang

I have nominated [[Image:Wu Tingfang1.jpg]] as a FP. Thought you might want to know. See Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Wu Tingfang. Jordan ^Contribs 18:24, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Also see this. Thanks, Jordan ^Contribs 18:31, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up. We already have some Bouguereau FPs, though. I don't think the size and resolution on that one will be enough to make it. Durova^Charge! 19:07, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

WP:NTWW

Is the link on this page still the correct way of joining the chat? Gary King (talk) 20:13, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

If you have trouble getting in that way, e-mail me and I'll get you in. Best, Durova^Charge! 20:14, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

The room is empty right now. Are you currently in there? Gary King (talk) 20:16, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

I think you've gone to the vestibule. We have a couple of people who man the vestibule but they aren't online right now. E-mail me your Skype ID please and I'll add you to contacts and bring you in directly. Durova^Charge! 20:17, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Sent Gary King (talk) 20:18, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

9/27/08 DYK

On 27 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article That Mysterious Rag, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! -- RyRy (talk) 05:45, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 05:47, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome, Durova. Nice touch with a song along with the hook by the way. :) We don't get something like that very often. Now readers can actually hear the song of the hook! -- RyRy (talk) 05:51, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Shoemaker's Holiday deserves credit for the template. He's been doing fantastic work with historic music. Best, Durova^Charge! 05:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: Thanks

Hi, thanks! That will be my first DYK ever. If you take a look at my user page you will see the types of articles I usually edit; today's article was quite different from what I normally work on. It was certainly interesting, though! Gary King (talk) 06:29, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Impressive work you've done! I was looking through Commons files the other day and noticed some good recordings of "O Canada". It'd be really good to nominate one of them for featured sound, but I'm not sure which is most appropriate. Would you help with selection? Best, Durova^Charge! 06:33, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I haven't touched Featured Sound, Featured Picture, or Featured Portal yet, and I try not to. I'd probably get sucked in pretty quickly if I started down that path, and plus, it's tough learning the criteria for each one at the beginning. I looked at some of the versions of "O Canada" that they had but wouldn't know which one is featured quality. If you guys ever want to collaborate on another article, though, then I'm in; perhaps we could work on a classical music composition instead next time? Gary King (talk) 06:40, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

I would absolutely love to work on classical music with you. Next time you're on Skype I'll show you a jaw-dropping archive: digitized compositions from the great composers in their own handwritten manuscripts. Let's pick something and go to work. :) Durova^Charge! 06:44, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Alright; I'm more interested in building articles to GA or FA rather than just DYK. I worked on Mozart and Beethoven briefly before, but those are probably projects that would take quite a bit of time to complete. Gary King (talk) 06:48, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Ludwig van Beethoven's manuscript sketch for Piano Sonata No. 28, Movement IV, Geschwind, doch nicht zu sehr und mit Entschlossenheit (Allegro), in his own handwriting. The piece was completed in 1816.

Funny you should mention them. With the new media restoration project I recently worked on Beethoven's manuscript sketch for movement IV of Piano Sonata No. 28. The same archive has a few of Mozart's handwritten scores and also Beethoven's handwritten and signed notes from listening to Don Giovanni. I wish I knew an encyclopedic use for that. Durova^Charge! 06:56, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

How are NTWW sessions usually scheduled? I'm guessing that someone just proposes a date and topic and then it moves on from there, each time? Gary King (talk) 00:11, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) Pretty much. Our regulars are from North America, Europe, and Australia. So any spot on the clock gets two but not all three. That's one reason we switch it around. Durova^Charge! 00:13, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for supporting me in my RfA, which passed with a count of (154/3/2). I appreciate the community's trust in me, and I will do my best to be sure it won't regret handing me the mop. I am honored by your trust and your support. Again, thank you. –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 19:34, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Advice

Your advice is appreciated, though I hesitate to debate you because I feel like my foil is much shorter than yours. Jehochman ^Talk 20:43, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

No foil needed, and if one appeared to be there... (Wiki Witch looks at own broomstick and scolds a naughty flying monkey that's chuckling in the corner. Drops some toad juice on the "foil" and it returns to its natural shape.) Seriously, I agree with you completely that disruptive editors shouldn't be allowed to play the "You said no to me so now you're involved and you need to go away" game, it's equally important to be prudent about the timing. The path of greatest credibility is to let the community examine the matter while striving to keep the waters as clear as possible. Durova^Charge! 21:00, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

ANI Thread needs attention

Could you please look at this thread? Thanks, ~ Troy (talk) 21:07, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Using popups to revert someone isn't the best idea. Have you gone to dispute resolution? A content request for comment on the article might bring in some fresh opinions and clear the air. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 21:16, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Oh crap. I broke the 3rr :/ what do I do? I already discussed it with that user, and he/she keeps typing with exclamation marks and all caps, mindlessly reverting the references and saying that they are "broken links". How many frickin' hours does it take? ~ Troy (talk) 21:22, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Suggest you post an admission of your 3RR violation to ANI, along with a promise not to repeat it and to enter regular dispute resolution instead. Durova^Charge! 21:24, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll turn myself in. ~ Troy (talk) 21:25, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

They're usually understanding when you're mature about it. Best, Durova^Charge! 21:29, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

{{dttr}}

Ouch! You've used a template to send a message to an experienced editor. Please review the essay Wikipedia:Don't template the regulars or maybe listen to a little advice. Doesn't this feel cold, impersonal, and canned? It's meant in good humour. Best wishes. User:Durova (talk) 01:51, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Xavexgoem (talk) 22:23, 27 September 2008 (UTC) 

Whee! :) Thanks much. Durova^Charge! 23:49, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Roman Catholic Church

Hello, you are receiving this message because you voted in the last FAC for this article. Currently, it is undergoing a peer review and I invite you to come view the page and offer any suggestions for improvement here [2]. Over the past three months, the page has been improved with additional scholarly works, trims, two new sections suggested in and attention to concerns raised during the last FAC. Thanks in advance for your time, attention and help to bring this important article to FA. NancyHeise ^talk 23:54, 27 September 2008 (UTC)

Request to restore a sound file

Hi there, I saw you were involved with WP:WPMR, but was left rather confused as to where to put proposals or requests, and so have decided instead to play it safe and message you with my request. It is this: would you be able to restore the quality of Image:Toreador song.ogg, namely by removing the background noise and static that is in the file?

Thanks in advance.

It Is Me Here (talk) 11:12, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Wonderful find! WPMR runs a mentorship service instead of a requests service. I suggest you post to the project talk page if you're interested in restoring the file, and one of our volunteers who works with sound will give you coaching. Maybe (if you're really lucky) one will fall in love with the file and restore it for you, but I can't make any promises--we've usually got more than we have time to do. Best, Durova^Charge! 11:39, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Well, OK, I'm glad you like the sound file, and I'll add a post at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Media Restoration, but I don't see how I'd be able to restore anything myself as I don't have any appropriate software (and will only get some if it's freeware - I don't want to spend any money on this venture; I hope you don't mind!). It Is Me Here (talk) 13:41, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

There's freeware available. Try Audacity. :) Durova^Charge! 17:19, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Ooh, very nice program - thanks a lot! It Is Me Here (talk) 18:40, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

No ill will, I hope

Just doing my "job" on NPP, and the original was without much content or context (in retrospect, I probably should have prodded instead). --Orange Mike | Talk 18:21, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately Wikipedia's coverage of ragtime is so weak that a moment like this is understandable. If the first post had been "X" is a blues song by Muddy Waters or "Y" is a country song by Loretta Lynn, would it have fared better? Durova^Charge! 18:24, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Not sure, to be honest. A lot of songs get in here that don't really qualify as notable, just because the singer is notable. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:48, 28 September 2008 (UTC)

Not to horn in on a conversation that's not really mine, but I came here to say essentially the same thing. If the article had stated that it was second in sales and considered a landmark in the first revision, it probably wouldn't have been deleted. Just my thoughts as a rank-and-file editor. Keep up the good work! shoy (reactions) 04:03, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. If you listen to the recording I was hoping someone else would make the first edit. My hands were already full with hosting the audio, etc. so I wrote less than usual. Still, the initial edit note promised more material soon and before the speedy tag went onto it I did post four reliable sources to the talk page. Durova^Charge! 04:12, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Li Bai

I wonder if you could resize the main image so the infobox doesn't carry over into the biography section? Ottre 07:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

That looks to be a template issue. It's actually larger in the template than it is on the hosting page. If you have an alternate portrait with proportions that are closer to square then the issue should resolve itself. The system is probably sizing the thing based upon an expected number of horizontal pixels; the proportions are throwing it off. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 07:57, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

There's nothing I can do to compensate for it. I just messed up the output levels. Ottre 08:41, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

It's an aspect ratio issue. The two viable solutions would be to locate another portrait or design a second template. Durova^Charge! 16:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:17th century Central Tibeten thanka of Guhyasamaja Akshobhyavajra, Rubin Museum of Art.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on October 1, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-10-01. howcheng {chat} 16:07, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

P.S. Image:SteamboatBenCampbellb.jpg is scheduled for October 4. howcheng {chat} 16:31, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you as always. :) Durova^Charge! 16:37, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

re Question

The thread you started links to a 2006 community ban discussion. The community wasn't doing topic bans yet in 2006; do you suppose a topic ban would work in this instance as an alternative to a full siteban? The editor is prolific and appears to doing good work outside of the hot button area. Durova^Charge! 06:05, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Sure. That is in fact my position -- including during 2006 (see the 2006 poll). My AN thread title talks about a "serious topic ban/ban" in case others see problems in other areas.

That being said, I'd not support a topic ban with an appeal option. That happened before. -- fayssal - wiki up^® 15:00, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

If he were topic banned instead of sitebanned, would he be able to post to the article talk pages? Durova^Charge! 17:06, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

Question

Please don't take this question the wrong way, but why aren't you an admin? I see you all over the place, on ANI, AN, and various other venues. Your comments at RFA are always good, and I see your name in practically every area that admins typically hang out. Basically, you are an admin in every area of this site except Special:ListUsers/Durova. What's up? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 01:39, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

(PLEASE!!! If you don't want to answer this question, just ignore it!!!! If you don't mind answering, but would rather that every doesn't see your reply, feel free to email me. My (real) address is j.delanoygmail [dot] com)

Simple. I was. I resigned. Durova^Charge! 02:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

*wonders if Durova wants to regain adminship* –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 02:32, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I may be one of the few people at this site who actually means it when I say the tools are no big deal. Durova^Charge! 02:34, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, OK. If you ever decide you want to run, give me a ring. J.delanoy^gabs_adds 02:35, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. It's flattering and really puts a smile on my face. Best, Durova^Charge! 02:52, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Lily of Killarney

Your Featured sound candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured sound status, Image:Hunters' Chorus from The Rose of Erin.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 02:23, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 02:29, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I Want to Go Back to Michigan

Your Featured sound candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured sound status, Image:I Want to Go Back to Michigan.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 02:27, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Response in FPC talk

I'm assuming at this point (I did say I'd try not to assume.. oh well) that you deliberately avoided replying on the talk page, and if so, we can leave the issue unsorted and I'm okay with that. Just wanted confirmation as you seem to go silent suddenly when presented with facts/arguments that you'd disagreed with, rather than talk them through. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 21:47, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, your comment had nothing to do with fine art. I asked you to withdraw it and instead you elaborated upon it. Detoured the thread quite effectively. Durova^Charge! 21:51, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

My comment had everything to do with the point you raised which was about how personal opinions affect voting on objective criteria, whether that be regarding fine art or any other subject that requires a degree of interpretation. And you can ask me to withdraw a comment, but if I feel it relevent to the debate, I'm not going to. Particularly if it seems more like you're just using the request to stifle my opinion on the subject. It wasn't a detour of the thread at all. In fact if you had replied, it may have served to involve more people's opinions on the subject. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 22:01, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

I really don't see how you can construe that out of a question about fine artworks that used Van Gogh, Cezanne, and Renoir as examples. Uncle Bungle had an interesting perspective about old master paintings; because of your off-topic comments those issues remain unaddressed. Durova^Charge! 22:07, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Even if my comment was off-topic (and I dispute that), I do think it is a huge stretch to suggest that I single handled caused everyone else to ignore your question. If anyone else wanted to comment, I don't see why they wouldn't have. Anyway, if I didn't give you my opinion, you'd only have one less reply on the thread. And in a way, I find it rude that you dismissed my opinion and asked me to withdraw it just because I related it to the question more generally than you wanted. Diliff | (Talk) (Contribs) 22:46, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

In general I like both you and your work; I respect your contributions. Several months ago we happened to disagree on whether the European Convention on Human Rights was applicable to a photograph taken by a non-notable photographer who could have resolved our differences by persuading his wife to send a two sentence e-mail to OTRS. Either he could not or he would not, although he aware of the onsite discussion and participated in it. I started a thread to ask whether noteworthy paintings by major artists should be judged by their encyclopedic value independent of individual Wikipedians' artistic tastes. At best, your comment required shifting ground from artistic taste to putative moral standards and disregarding the fine art aspect entirely. When I replied that the purported moral judgment was a phantom, you contended that my reading of the human rights convention was incorrect (implicitly reasserting that morality was indeed the issue?) Well whether I understand that convention or not, it still has very little to do with the post-impressionists or any other major area of art history. I don't see new points to discuss about the old, closed FPC you continue to raise, and neither do I see feedback about the matter I hoped to discuss. So let's just let it rest. Durova^Charge! 23:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)

Gene Poole clarify?

Hi - is your comment in relation to the block or posting the email or extending the block or ...? regards just a tad confused --Matilda ^talk 01:08, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

It refers to the notion that wiki consensus could overrule copyright law even if we wanted it to. See User:Durova/Reality check. Durova^Charge! 01:11, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah as in When you receive an email message, remember that you do not own the copyright; that is owned by the sender, or the sender's employer. :) My confusion was that the debate was on the validity of the blocks too. --Matilda ^talk 01:46, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Yar. :) Durova^Charge! 01:50, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom amendment request

I've opened a request for an amendment to the Mantanmoreland ArbCom case based on today's Register story [3]. Cla68 (talk) 02:29, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Nevermind [4]. Cla68 (talk) 03:15, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Well I hope this translates into an incentive for him to respect his ban. Durova^Charge! 04:16, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

WP:AN discussion

As a user who contributed to the discussion concerning Koavf (talk · contribs), you're invited to comment at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Specific_Sanctions_-_proposals also. Thanks - Ncmvocalist (talk) 04:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi Durova - I think sanction 5 was what fitted your wording, because sanction 1 extends to talk pages too. Can you clarify which one you meant? Cheers. Ncmvocalist (talk) 05:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'll follow up in a sec (wrapping up a piece of Photoshop work atm). Durova^Charge! 05:34, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Double checking now: I do specify option 1 in the post. Anything unclear? Durova^Charge! 05:41, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah you specify sanction 1 (Morrocco and Western Sahara related pages- includes talk pages) but you say you'll support the version of Morrocco and Western Sahara related articles which actually corresponds to sanction 5, so wanted your clarification there. :) Ncmvocalist (talk) 05:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

What I mean is that one significant POV in this debate believes that Western Sahara and Morocco are unrelated. So I'd support option 1 if it were worded to include both. Durova^Charge! 05:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying. :) Ncmvocalist (talk) 14:55, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

FPC

Hi, I was wondering whether you had the original source for that FPC you're running. It's a fantastic document. If the technical side could get a boost I'd love to change to support. Not much I can to with that particular file, though. Durova^Charge! 04:18, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I think your objections to that image were valid and I'm not upset about it. I'm not sure what I can do to fix it. The document that it comes from has a lot of excellent images that I hope to nominate in the future after they are placed in appropriate articles. Cla68 (talk) 06:54, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Try Commons:Help:Scanning. Durova^Charge! 07:12, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Olympics Photo Poll

Another canvass. YellowMonkey (choose Australia's next top model) 08:44, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand? Durova^Charge! 08:46, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

The "choose Australia's next top model" link. You responded to my last photogrpahic survey. YellowMonkey (choose Australia's next top model) 08:53, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, will have a look. Durova^Charge! 19:42, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Racial segregation

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Segregation 1938b.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 10:02, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 14:47, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Apache-killing-Iraq.avi.ogg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on October 5, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-10-05. This one needs to have a close eye on the caption; I'm worried about the complaints to arise from wing-nuts in response, so I want to make sure this is neutral. Thanks. howcheng {chat} 20:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Whew, you might want to reconsider whether to run this on the main page. It was the most difficult nomination for me to write. Frankly, if you held one image off that location, it would be better to run the seagull and withhold this instead. Durova^Charge! 20:46, 2 October 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, the seagull image is problematic because it makes us look amateurish, whereas this is problematic because its subject matter is controversial. The latter is not an issue as far as I'm concerned, as long as it's handled fairly. howcheng {chat} 18:38, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

It took about five minutes to write up the seagull nomination. This one I mulled over for a month before nominating, and as you've no doubt noticed that nomination statement wouldn't transfer well to the main page. IMO, anyone whose maturity level has progressed beyond early adolescence can see that the seagull photograph is superbly timed and depicts a legitimate topic in biology. This one on the main page gives me pause, though, because that could be construed as exploitive in a way that featured designation alone doesn't imply. I don't have an answer to that objection. Maybe a month from now I'll be able to address that tastefully, yet IMO one animal excreting waste is much less problematic than the recent deaths of three human beings. It's the most difficult subject I've ever taken on at FPC (and as you know I've tried some hard ones). Durova^Charge! 18:48, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

So I was pleasantly surprised that there wasn't much reaction to the video. I saw the note on the image talk page, but there was balanced by an encouraging note on Talk:Main Page, and that discussion was mostly about the technical aspects of the video format. howcheng {chat} 02:40, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, that's over. Amazing the inferences some people draw, like that IP who thought it was a political anti-American thing. Durova^Charge! 02:48, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello, Durova. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at WP:ANI regarding the recent sockpuppetry case at Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/63.3.1.1 (2nd) and a user who has exercised the right to vanish. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#RTV revisited. Thank you. --MuZemike (talk) 00:55, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I am giving you the courtesy notification because it looks like that you closed the discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Archive169#Right to vanish and not vanished, and I thought you may have some say in the matter. Thank you again, MuZemike (talk) 00:59, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, it's best to bring these to the community's attention once the suspicion has been resolved. Too early and it either gets overlooked or turns into pure drama. If checkuser comes back positive then I'd support a siteban. Durova^Charge! 01:53, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Image handling

I see that you are online, so I'll ask a quick bit of advice. I encountered this image Image:TALK PAGE.JPG (rude, but no nudity) on an editor's talk page while I was there to leave a message about his misuse of fair-use images in a biography. I removed it on the basis of it being an obviously derivative image, and thus not allowed in Talk space (I won't even talk about WP:CIVIL in relation to this). Wjmummert (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) has now claimed that it's his girlfriends, not a catalog scan, which I find dubious, to say the least. Anything that you can see wrong in my actions? Wjmummert just raised a no vote in my RFA, so it is of at least a little importance, even though I can't see this as being the final piece of kindling on the funeral pyre.—Kww(talk) 02:09, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

An editor who was nearly indeffed for copyright violations now claims that all three of the models are his girlfriend? Okay, I'm prepared to believe one of two things. Either he uploads all three photographs with full camera metadata within the next 24 hours, or else this is his real girlfriend. Durova^Charge! 02:19, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Most young lads date Rosy Palms for a while. A comment affirming my judgment call (even if you oppose my adminship) would be greatly appreciated.—Kww(talk) 02:22, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

If it made any difference I would. Please give me a heads-up if you run again. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 02:25, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

You have mail

By the way, notice my IP...--172.130.132.173 (talk) 04:17, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Frog Legs Rag

On 3 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frog Legs Rag, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 04:27, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 05:45, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Map of Yellowstone National Park, 1871

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Yellowstone 1871b.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 07:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Durova^Charge! 07:40, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Pictures

All of these logos fall under fair use. They are all relavent. If you want to challenge these, please challenge EVERY logo on every sports team article here. Also, there are plenty of pictures of stores here on Wikipedia, and there is NOWHERE where it states that a picture of a building is not fair use. Wjmummert (KA-BOOOOM!!!!) 16:24, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Well then, relicense your images and add add fair use rationales. Durova^Charge! 16:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:ANI#Block_on_User:Gene_Poole

Thanks for your response. I appreciate your attempt to educate editors on this issue. Viriditas (talk) 23:35, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the comment. :) Durova^Charge! 23:39, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Q&A

thanks, not nearly as interesting as the other one though!! : ) Semitransgenic (talk) 02:10, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Daft Punk GA Review

I have made all the improvements that you recommended to the Daft Punk article. The bootleg video has been removed, citations moved to the end of sentences and repeat wikilinks removed. It is ready for a second review now. Thanks. A State Of Trance (talk) 03:46, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast. I'll be right there. :) Durova^Charge! 03:47, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for I'm Just Wild About Harry

On 4 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article I'm Just Wild About Harry, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 04:59, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 05:04, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Image:Emmeline Pankhurst I.png

Is this image a good restoration candidate? Emmeline Pankhurst is on its way to featured status and deserves a good image. :) I can see it in History of feminism, Feminist history in the United Kingdom and other feminism-related articles. Awadewit (talk) 18:35, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

The source file is a little on the small side, but I'll have a look at it. Downloading now. Durova^Charge! 18:39, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

There are problems with it at full size. I could do a bit of work on it, but the file doesn't have the potential for becoming a featured picture. Durova^Charge! 18:42, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Too bad. Thanks for looking. Awadewit (talk) 20:20, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Actually the new version doesn't look half bad at thumbnail size. Might pass valued image candidacy on Commons if you feel like nominating it. Durova^Charge! 20:21, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Sceptre unblock proposal

Just keeping you abreast with developments: User talk:AGK#Re: Sceptre.
Best, Anthøny ✉ 19:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Featured List contest

Hey Durova, this is IMatthew (talk · contribs), co-coordinator of the WikiCup; just informing you of the Featured List contest, starting this coming Friday. You may want to check it out; it will keep you busy for the time being before the WikiCup starts around January. Thanks for listening! iMatthew (talk) 22:02, 5 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh boy... plenty busy already. I do have plans for a featured list or two, but hesitate to sign on as a formal commitment. Durova^Charge! 22:29, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Do it! ;) Gary King (talk) 23:18, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Gah, will you team up with me Gary? I'd like to start with List of compositions by James Scott, but it needs a series of supporting articles. Was planning to skim a few more DYKs from that pool...Durova^Charge! 23:49, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Maybe when I'm done some of my own lists for the contest first :) If you need help with formatting the table or anything, then feel free to let me know. Regarding prose, though, I'm probably not as useful. Gary King (talk) 23:56, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Dangit, you might just talk me into this... Durova^Charge! 23:57, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

The great thing about this is that there's a definitive end for it, so it doesn't go on forever :) Gary King (talk) 00:06, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Featured sound candidate promoted!

Common blackbird

Your Featured sound candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured sound status, Image:Turdus merula 2.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. --MZMcBride (talk) 03:51, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 03:52, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for That International Rag

On 6 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article That International Rag, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

well done on the sounds, makes a nice change. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 22:25, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)

The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:26, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your message

Nadezhda, thanks for your message. Quick reply here. I see you still haven't commented on the second proposal. It seems the problem can't be resolved within WP:FSC, given the present situation. P.S. Please leave details of the Puccini MS. on my talk page. Best. --Kleinzach 00:18, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your patience. I'll be there soon. And I'd love to have your input on the manuscripts. Durova^Charge! 10:51, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Milhist Triple Crown revisited

We talked about this briefly in June. It's been raised again by the coordinators and I'd very much appreciate it if you could perhaps comment here? Many thanks for your time, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 04:12, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Ok, will soon. Durova^Charge! 10:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

"Sales link" in Photogravure

Unfortunately I haven't been able to find any pure (unpriced) photogravure examples at Graphicstudio. I'm not connected with the studio or the artists in any way, I just want to illustrate modern photogravure. Do you think it is legitimate to link directly to one of the Graphicstudio images? For example Modern (three color) photogravure by Robert Mapplethorpe with Graphicstudio. - Pointillist (talk) 07:33, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, that would be fine. We've had a persistent problem at some of the related articles such as daguerrotype where anonymous IPs keep adding and then restoring promotional links to several artists. Your edit looked like good faith, yet once one link of that sort shows up others tend to collect. Thank you for the clever solution! :) Durova^Charge! 07:52, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Done. I see your point - the same thing happens on Desktop Publishing once a week, too. - Pointillist (talk) 08:10, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Ain't We Got Fun?

On 7 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ain't We Got Fun?, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Cirt (talk) 09:09, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Durova^Charge! 10:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Cedar Key, Florida 1884

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Cedar Key 1884b small.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 10:14, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 10:50, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Those windmills you were wondering about....

Here they are, feel free to count them :)

...not sure if it'll pass FP but it's in a bunch of articles now. best. Mfield (talk) 18:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Gorgeous! I'd vote for it. Now there's an old song rattling in my head... :) Best, Durova^Charge! 18:35, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Migrant family of the Great Depression

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Langechildren2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 10:36, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 18:08, 9 October 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Oh! How I Hate to Get Up in the Morning

On 10 October, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Oh! How I Hate to Get Up in the Morning, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 05:20, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, I'd better rush and finish the next one before time runs out. :) Durova^Charge! 06:18, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Featured sound candidate promoted! (Again!)

Tokay gecko mating call

Your Featured sound candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured sound status, Image:Mating call of a male Tokay gecko (Gekko gecko).ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. --MZMcBride (talk) 06:44, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. Next time I go to Southeast Asia I'll be sure to play it and see whether any female amphibians show up with a rose between their teeth ready to tango. :) Durova^Charge! 06:48, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

• Congratulations!
  *Watches Durova chalk up yet another featured credit.*

  Boy, you do put me to shame. :) Anthøny ✉ 19:38, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Easy enough when you get into it. I've been feeling guilty about not putting up more candidates this week. Want to collaborate? Durova^Charge! 19:42, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

That's a great opportunity that you've offered me, but I'm pretty busy at the moment. I simply don't have the time to contribute anything just now! Sorry, Durova. Real life can be such a pain sometimes. :\ Anthøny ✉ 19:58, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

FPc question

How would i convert it to tif version? —Ceran (Fly!) 19:27, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

The original Library of Congress archival version is the thing to work from. That'll come in a .tif file. If they have multiple versions available then select the largest one. If you'd like, download Skype and email me for my username there. I'll be glad to answer questions as you go. Best, Durova^Charge! 19:41, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Um, is there any way I can download the image without buying quicktime? —Ceran (Fly!) 20:11, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Yes, just download and open into your image processing program. Durova^Charge! 20:39, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Flag song

Flag song

Congratulations! Your featured sound candidate has been promoted. Your nomination for featured sound status, Image:Flag song.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. --MZMcBride (talk) 18:42, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Harry Potter

Hi there,

Per Skype - here's your reminder - if you can, please copy edit that article! :D

The Helpful One ^Review 20:44, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

personal attacks by user logical premise

http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User:Logical_Premise/editorluv
Thought you might want to know about these personal attacks.
Messengerbot (talk) 21:10, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh good grief. If he/she doesn't consider that a personal attack, I wonder what that individual does when they set out to be insulting. Durova^Charge! 21:14, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Logical Premise/editorluv. Thanks. -- how do you turn this on 21:24, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the heads up, both of you. Possibly best if I bow out, though. Looks like someone who's itching for a fight. Very decent of you to let me know. All the best, Durova^Charge! 21:25, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Omar Rabbi Elozor

Do you think that this traditional Rabbinic song would make a good new article? Shoemaker's Holiday (talk) 09:33, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

It could. Not something I'm likely to be able to write, though. Durova^Charge! 21:08, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Shine On, Harvest Moon

Shine On, Harvest Moon

Congratulations! Your featured sound candidate has been promoted. Your nomination for featured sound status, Image:Ada Jones and Billy Murray - Shine On, Harvest Moon.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. --MZMcBride (talk) 17:31, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 21:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

Report card

One year ago tomorrow, you gave me a barnstar. Recently, I got a DYK on a well known Spanish modernisme architect article that I created, at least as well known as a modernisme architect can be. I presume that many people don't know a single architect of any kind! Chergles (talk) 19:03, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

Wonderful! Keep up the good work. Cheers, Durova^Charge! 19:10, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

New Picture

I have added a new picture to the article Uniforms of the Confederate Military, I would like you to see it and tell me what you think. --LORDoliver † (talk) 22:03, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

You mean Image:Private Edwin Francis Jemison.jpg? It needs a statement about copyright. Otherwise much better. It would be a good idea to upload these images to Wikipedia's sister project, Wikimedia Commons, so that other language editions of Wikipedia would have access to the material. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 22:43, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I have now added the copyright info to the picture thanks!--LORDoliver † (talk) 23:21, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Hey, check out the new info I put on the article. --LORDoliver † (talk) 23:22, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

I've got some prior commitments to catch up on, so I'll leave a note at the DYK discussion and can't make a commitment to do much more. For reference, though commons:Commons:Upload is usually the best place to upload images--especially Civil War era material. Wikipedia's local uploading is designed to accommodate limited types of material: mostly fair use copyrighted material and a few items that are public domain in the United States but aren't public domain globally. Commons is the central media hosting site for all Wikimedia Foundation projects. So when another language edition of Wikipedia writes about the Confederacy they could use your uploads if they're hosted at Commons, but couldn't use the images if you upload locally. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 23:28, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much for all of the help! --LORDoliver † (talk) 23:32, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Gladly, and thank you for your hard work. :) Durova^Charge! 04:52, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Wallace histogram

Before I put it up on the FPC page, what do you think of this? I was having issues deciding what looked realistic here, without making the papers too white or the suits too dark. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:35, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

It's workable. I'm not thrilled about the image because of its compositional problems: Wallace is in full profile and cut off at the ankle. But definitely an improvement. Durova^Charge! 17:35, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, if i wanted to get the verticals vertical his leg had to be chopped off.  :( I think I like the profile though - it makes him look intense. Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:14, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Ping :)

		All Around Amazing Barnstar
		Because you have so many featured things, work well in featured sounds, are great to talk to about anything Wikipedia and are basically an all round good egg, I proudly give you this. Garden. 10:36, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. What a pleasant surprise! :) Durova^Charge! 17:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Woody Guthrie

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Woody Guthrie 2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 12:09, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 17:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Ain't We Got Fun?

I reviewed your article Ain't We Got Fun? for GA and unfortunately had to fail the article due to my concerns outlined at Talk:Ain't We Got Fun?/GA1. Although I believe the article needs a fair amount of reworking, I can put the article on hold if you want to try to fix the article.

Let me know what you want. If I do not hear from you I will fail the article. I am also notifying your co-nominator.

Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 17:08, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

If he'd like to work on it we'll see. I thought it was the weakest of my recent GAC nominees and was a bit surprised he wanted to put it up. Durova^Charge! 17:37, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

IIRC

You proposed something similar in the past arbcom: what do you think of this motion of mine? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:33, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Commented. Why does this feel like tilting at windmills? Durova^Charge! 18:43, 16 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your opinion on Ginger Jolie. I really have a problem understanding some people's point of view on this. Steve Dufour (talk) 07:39, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Subject requests for BLP deletion have been a source of tension for several years now. We haven't achieved the best balance yet. Durova^Charge! 07:56, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your time

Good luck with all the music packages you're creating. I'll be interested especially in the Wagner one. ···日本穣^{? · Talk to Nihonjoe} 01:17, 18 October 2008 (UTC) Will do. :) Durova^Charge! 01:27, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Are you on?

? J.delanoy^gabs_adds 08:08, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Online? Yes... Durova^Charge! 08:21, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I was around trying to find a Commons administrator. One of the images on Main Page was not uploaded locally and was not protected on Commons, and I kind of overreacted. (read: I posted this here. When you didn't respond immediately, I went to Commons and looked at the deletion log, and made a far more dramatic post on his talk page. When he did not respond immediately, I uploaded the file locally and protected it. About 3 minutes late, the admin on Commons protected the image, so I deleted the local copy. All told, I ran up my blood-adrenaline level pretty high, made two or three utterly useless edits, and made three log entries for no really good reason. Oh, well.... J.delanoy^gabs_adds 08:29, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Ouch. Well, I'm usually available by gmail chat and Skype if you need a Commons admin in a jiffy. Best, Durova^Charge! 08:36, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Why won't my image display

Image:Talcott Mountain Fall.jpg

I can't figure this out. Jehochman ^Talk 22:37, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Lately Commons has had an occasional problem with thumbnail generation. It usually resolves itself in a few minutes. You might try re-uploading. If the problem hasn't fixed itself in a few hours, send me the file and I'll make it my problem. Durova^Charge! 22:54, 18 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Havana, Cuba c.1639

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Havana 1639b.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 08:14, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 08:40, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

FPC - One of yours

I've nominated an old image of yours, Image:Old timer structural worker2.jpg. Be sure to comment at FPC. Best, —Ceranthor^(Sing) 14:23, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Article recommended for deletion

I notice that you have put Rick Ross (consultant) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) up for deletion. May I recommend putting Jason Scott case (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) up for deletion, as well? I would have done it myself, except that I cannot create the required AfD page.

Wikipedia already had an article, Jason Scott (Life Tabernacle Church) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), on the central individual in this event. Since this event is the only thing this individual is notable for, the common-sense presumption is that anything which could be said about the "Jason Scott case" would have been included in the article on Jason Scott. I have specifically asked Jayen466 (at this point virtually the only person who has edited Jason Scott case (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)) if he has any reason whatsoever to believe that his article contains significant factual material that was excluded from the previous article (asked here and here) and received no response from him. The logical conclusion is that the topic of the Jason Scott case was already covered in the previous article, and it was not found notable enough to prevent the article from being deleted for a lack of notability: (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jason Scott (Life Tabernacle Church) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)).

In addition, one might look at the history of how the article came to be created and think they were looking at a classic POV fork. Jayen466 very much favors the use of Anson Shupe and Susan Darnell, especially their book Agents of Discord, as a source on Rick Ross and matters related to him. There is substantial controversy over trying to treat Shupe and Darnell as reliable "third party" sources on the Jason Scott case, since Shupe was in fact an expert witness for the plaintiffs in that case -- one who, moreover, admitted that he did not base his statements in the case upon the full statements of the plaintiffs and defendants, but upon excerpts provided by the plaintiff's lawyer, whom he said he trusted to provide a "pretty good sample of the depositions". This lawyer was in fact long-time attorney for the Church of Scientology Kendrick Moxon, who was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Federal trial resulting from Operation Snow White, for providing false handwriting samples to the court. Obviously, even though Jayen466 may say that "Shupe is a reliable source, for WP purposes, for the statements he makes"([5]) Shupe's statements cannot be simply used as if they were the assessment of an uninvolved scholar regarding a situation in which he does not have a personal stake. Jayen466 tried to use Shupe as such a source at Rick Ross (consultant) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) and encountered serious opposition (see Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard/Archive224#Rick Ross (consultant), Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Anson Shupe and sources with known inaccuracies and the history of the Rick Ross article) and subsequently created Jason Scott case (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views), where Shupe and Darnell's Agents of Discord is cited no less than 37 times. This certainly has all the appearances of a POV fork: Editor A wants to include statements in an existing article; other editors raise objections to those statements for content policy reasons; Editor A then creates a new article and includes those same statements.

I think that if the issues with Rick Ross (consultant) are severe enough to raise the question of its deletion, the issues with its spinoff article Jason Scott case are severe enough to practically mandate deletion. -- 65.78.13.238 (talk) 17:37, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the suggestion. My standing offer applies to biographies themselves, strictly speaking, and this one was speedily kept. Your suggestion seems to have merit and I would probably support a proposal to delete the other article, but I don't actually edit in that area. Durova^Charge! 17:59, 19 October 2008 (UTC)

Contest Invitation

Hello there!

You have been invited to enter C4v3m4n's Contest!.

The contest is designed to provide users with a challenge while still having fun! This month's contest is focused on Movember, a month designed to to raise awareness and funds for men's health issues, such as prostate cancer and depression in Australia and New Zealand.

Follow the link given above to find out more information. Hope to see you there!

${\mathfrak {C}}{\mathfrak {4}}{\mathfrak {v}}{\mathfrak {3}}{\mathfrak {m}}{\mathfrak {4}}{\mathfrak {n}}$ 04:21, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

It sounds like a fine idea. I'm a bit overcommitted at the moment. And although it sounds like an excellent cause you're supporting...that's one of the types of cancer I'm least likely to get. Durova^Charge! 04:59, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:DutchGapb.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on October 27, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-10-27. howcheng {chat} 21:40, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 00:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Good to see it finally featured. Good job =) Louis Waweru  Talk  14:28, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

beading article

Hi Durova,

I accept to expand on my piece about 3D beading in the beading article. I just don't understand why you keep deleting my post. I'm simply trying to help expose the world to 3D beading because there's so few resources out there about it. I found this great one and I wanted to share it with others. Can you imagine a website that offers free 3D beading patterns? It's unheard of and people deserve to know, and what better way to share it. But sure, I'll write more about it. I can write descriptions of each technique used, how it's used, and what projects are best suited to be beaded in 3D.

Regards, 3dbeading —Preceding unsigned comment added by 3dbeading (talk • contribs) 22:01, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I have posted replies both to your account and on the talk page of the article. Wikipedia does not exist to advertise amateur websites. Please cite the regularly published books, magazines, etc. that you used to gain your skill and interest in beading. Durova^Charge! 22:53, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I invite you to report me to the site's administration. That website is not my site, and it's not amateur, it's one of the most professional sites I've seen about beading. It is where I have learned everything I know about beading. I never had to read any magazines to learn beading because that site is just such a good beading reference, thorough and easy to understand. Beading is not a controversial science, it's an art. It's not like science where you need an "official" source because the information may be wrong. Clearly a beading pattern is not right or wrong, it is simply an objective form of instruction. If you knew anything about beading, you would know that. There is another beading site listed in the references of the article which, as you have so eloquently stated, is not an official magazine or book. It's an "amateur" website. (beadjewelrymaking.com).. I have seen this website and it's also a wonderful beading source of information. As is 3Dbeading.com. I am a loyal visitor of both sites, and I stand by them. So report me to the administrators, please. I wish to inform them of the harrassment that I have received from you for wanting to do a good deed and share information on the internet. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 3dbeading (talk • contribs) 23:10, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

I see

I see, so you're saying real printed books. The thing is, with 3D beading, there are no printed books except those written in Japanese. So I wouldn't be able to read those anyways. That's why I said in my article that it's so limited access to English speakers. There are no books written in English about the type of beading on that website. What that person did was actually make their own patterns based on their knowledge of beading. Isn't that kind of the same thing as printing a book? It's like an online book. The only difference is that one was printed on paper. Anyways, would it be better placed in the external pages then? I wouldn't know how to reference my actual piece then since there's no English books about 3D beading. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 3dbeading (talk • contribs) 23:45, 22 October 2008 (UTC)

The problem is that this site is self-published. Japanese sources could be citable when there's a lack of reliably published sources in English, and perhaps a bilingual speaker who'd help you with that. Another alternative would be to talk to a research librarian about sources in English and possibly do an interlibrary loan. Durova^Charge! 00:00, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

I don't understand what you mean by self-published. You mean not verified by editors or something? I guess that's true, but with beading, there's no need for editors because it's not something that's right or wrong. You know what I mean? As long as a person can follow the pattern from start to finish and end up with what was promised before they started. I've made most of the patterns they offer on there, and they did work out in the end to be the same as what was in the picture. And they are so thorough with their instructions, I couldn't believe what I had stumbled upon in google. I don't know why they're doing it for free. Well, I guess the same reason as wikipedia is sharing info for free, for the good of mankind, who knows right! Who cares really, as long as they keep doing it! Should I put that site in the links section instead of the references section? I guess the other two sites are listed in the links section. I just put it in the references section because I was using it to reference my piece, but that's okay. --3dbeading (talk) 00:09, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Hi again Durova, I took out the references to that site from my piece. I will look into beading books. It's gonna be hard because they are so limited. I've looked at my public library lots of times, believe me!!! I love beading and I've ransacked the whole city and internet looking for references and patterns. But for you and for wikipedia, I'll keep looking. Like I even said in my article, it would be great if there were more beading references out there. It feels like beading is an art for the outcasts because there's so little info out there. I mean, for 3D beading anyway. There's lots about 2D beading, but it's not as fun! Sorry about the misunderstanding. I don't like to make enemies, I hope we can be friends!--3dbeading (talk) 00:54, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Requesting a peer review

Heya, if you have a few minutes could you take a looksee at two articles that I have up for peer review? They're both really short – too short to even be featured, in fact, so I'd just like to receive any comments at all to improve them. They are:

• List of universities in Alberta (peer review)
• List of universities in Manitoba (peer review)

Thanks in advance! Gary King (talk) 05:15, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Done. Durova^Charge! 05:56, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! Gary King (talk) 06:00, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Rick Ross AfD

Thanks for your note. As a long time Wikipedian I always respect your input on situations and especially as nom of this AfD, it was good to hear. Have a nice day! TravellingCari 12:03, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, and best wishes. Durova^Charge! 19:42, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Re: Right to vanish and not vanished

Since you were the closer of the AN/I thread, I thought I might give you a heads-up that the user in question is back, as User:A Nobody. I did not participate in the AN/I, but I did read it and followed it. Since you noted in closing the discussion that if the user came back a conduct RFC would probably be in order, do you think that's the next step? I feel pretty firmly that the user's swift return after only a month, added to the issues addressed in the AN/I, represents a clear abuse of the RTV courtesy granted to him by the community. True, he hasn't resumed the same activities which were his major problem areas before, and he's operating under a new identity, but it is merely a renaming of his old account, and RTV is not a right to a fresh start...it means the person, not the account, is leaving the project. Neither has actually happened. In fact the end result merely amounts to a change of username and a shift in editing activity (since his original username now redirects to his new name...clearly not "vanished" in any sense). I can only conclude that the user's claims of real-world harrassment which necessitated a vanishing from WP were specious, or that he never actually intended to vanish. Either way, I think it ought to be addressed since his original "vanishing" resulted in such a brouhaha and he has returned to active editing. What do you think? --IllaZilla (talk) 19:12, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

P.S. If the first image on your userpage is an indication of where you live, then this is a coincidence because I do too. Born & raised. Just wanted to note the coincidence. --IllaZilla (talk) 19:23, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

The purpose of conduct RFCs are to bring the community together and demonstrate a problem, in order to ask a user to change behavior and eliminate the problem. Is his current behavior still objectionable? Durova^Charge! 19:47, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

I just noticed that the topic has been addressed elsewhere, so I guess nothing further need be done at the moment. As for the behavior, I guess it depends on whether you mean just his edits, or the fact that he's editing at all. Are his edits right now objectionable? It seems not, though there are those who find them questionable/borderline disruptive. Is the fact that he's editing at all objectionable? I'd say so. Saying you need to vanish, then causing as much fuss in the process as he did, and then returning to the project not even a month later...I'd call that objectionable behavior, even though he has a different editing pattern this time around. It's essentially disruptive and gaming the system, sort of like going into the Witness Protection Program, getting a change of identity, but then moving back into your old house and working at the same place of business. Given the amount of grief the community's already had to put up with from this whole affair, and the courtesies extended, on what basically amounts to "the editor who cried vanish"...yeah, I'd call that objectionable. --IllaZilla (talk) 20:00, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, this may come up in a more formal setting at some point so I'll be candid and summarize here. Yes, I've been in touch with him. Yes, I advised against his return in this way. And yes, part of my caution had to do with the loss of credibility it would entail about his vanishing. As long as he's doing all or most of what an RFC would have asked him to alter, though, I'm not certain what RFC would accomplish. Durova^Charge! 20:23, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks for the response. --IllaZilla (talk) 20:39, 24 October 2008 (UTC)

Thx

...for the 1 second revert on my talk. I owe you one. Steven Walling (talk) 01:51, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Anytime. :) Durova^Charge! 04:07, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you.

I'm astonished anyone here even remembers me. Pemberley is well and Elizabeth sends her love. I don't know how long I'll be in the City this time but it is always good to hear from an old friend. Cheers. Mr. Darcy talk 03:56, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

A new vice

Wikipedia emoticons. Jehochman ^Talk 20:04, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

rofl...this is too tempting. "When choosing between two vices I always pick the one I haven't tried before." - Mae West Durova^Charge! 20:10, 25 October 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates/Oh! How I Hate to Get Up in the Morning

Oh! How I Hate to Get Up in the Morning

Congratulations! Your featured sound candidate has been promoted. Your nomination for featured sound status, Image:Irving Berlin - Arthur Fields - Oh! How I Hate To Get Up In The Morning.ogg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another sound, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured sound candidates. --MZMcBride (talk) 00:21, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! :) Durova^Charge! 01:22, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

John Ogden (photographer)

I realised after our skypecast the other day that I've missed a possibly opportunity to get a 'DYK' nomination in for this one! hey ho, it's not the end of the world... as I think you know, I'm in touch with John, and am hoping to get some appropriately licensed images for the article, as well as maybe fleshing out some details on his early work (I'm concerned that only primary sources and 'original research' might be available though) - but I'd love general feedback or ideas of any kind on the article, because it'd be great to get it to GA before too long! (my drive to get Socrates to FA is turning out to be.. well... rather slow paced!) best, Privatemusings (talk) 04:44, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

thanks for diving in! - I'd preach caution over categorising the aboriginal flag eye as a 'novelty item', because it's an extremely sensitive subject down here (despite levels on which the term is self-evidently accurate) we'll get it there quick sharp! cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 05:11, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh I see, well you'd be better than I to give it the proper culturally sensitive approach. I'm more than a little bit out of the loop on those nuances. Looking toward GA, I suggest you move detailed information with citations down into the article body and summarize without citations in the lead. Durova^Charge! 05:13, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I tweaked the wording a bit, and moved a bit of movie info. into the body - I think that's what you mean? - I also pinged you on commons on an entirely unrelated matter.... cheers, Privatemusings (talk) 05:38, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

More like this: the intro summarizes without citations, and the article body repeats the same material at greater length with citations. That's customary at GA level. Durova^Charge! 05:40, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Best photo links?

Sometimes I've found that the best help pages aren't easy to find, as they can be in the form of essays or hidden as subpages nested two layers deep inside user space. I'm sure you know what I mean. With that said, can you recommend the best Wikipedia/Commons article(s) on prepping personal images (intended for articles) for commons? I've got a dozen or so photos I want to upload, but I want them to look their best. In other words, I want them to adhere to Durova standards. :) Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 08:32, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Aw, thanks very much. I'm not sure who's written the best essay on that, but if you'd like to send me the photos as attachments (.tif format please) I'll be glad to give them a little work for you. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 08:34, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the offer! Since I'm on a wireless connection, my upload speed is somewhat slow, so sending them to you as a .tif could take some time. Right now, I'm just working in RAW. I guess I'm just looking for a checklist that I can use on my end. If you know of one, please let me know. Viriditas (talk) 08:43, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Well, generally speaking the first thing to do is rotate (if necessary) and crop. Then adjust color and histogram, if needed. Durova^Charge! 08:45, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Right. The only problem I'm running into in that regard is color, but that's because of my white balance. Viriditas (talk) 08:46, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Not sure what software you're using. If you're in Photoshop, autocolor is often worth a go. Otherwise just head in and fix it manually. I like to start with highlights and then go down to midtones etc. Durova^Charge! 08:49, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm using GIMP on ubuntu, believe it or not. Probably not the best thing, but there it is. I'm also using the standard Canon software (DPP). I have not had the temerity to purchase the new version of PS, but it's on my to do list. I think what I'm going to do is send you one .tif when I get home in a few hours. No hurry on this. Thanks. Viriditas (talk) 08:55, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Sure thing. I'm not a GIMP user myself, mainly because it doesn't have a healing brush (which I use extensively for restoration). But if I see what you're working with I'll be glad to help. If you're interested, Skype is a good client for file transfers and we could review this in real time. It's a free download; email me and I'll send you my ID. Best, Durova^Charge! 09:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, I use Skype. I'll e-mail you my ID but I won't be on until later, and I'll probably be tired to talk. Tomorrow during the day might be better for me. Viriditas (talk) 09:05, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

image deletion discussion notification

G'Day D - further to the matter I raised on commons yesterday - there's another image in pretty much the same boat being considered for deletion here on en-wiki. Being wise in the ways of images etc. I thought I'd let you know :-) best, Privatemusings (talk) 22:38, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

Valient Return Triple Crown

Dear Durova,

I was surprised to learn that I may be the first editor to qualify for the Valient Return Triple Crown though I'm not entirely sure that that would be viewed by most editors as an honor. In fact maybe you'd want to rename it as the "Unrepentent Triple Crown," or even the "Ivan the Terrible Triple Crown."

BTW, I think we rubbed elbows (or maybe threw some elbows) during the Matanmorland controversy. I'll be the first to admit that I can rub some people the wrong way at times.

As far as qualifications: FA - Tulip mania - which ran as Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 30, 2008.

• This was a very collaborative effort with User:JayHenry in the lead, but see User Talk:Smallbones#Tulip mania for his views (or just ask him directly). See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tulip mania, and [6] and the good article nomination (where I was somewhat less directly involved)

GA - Chambersburg, Pennsylvania - I think I have about 30% of the edits and 75% of the content since January 2007 on this one, but didn't nominate it myself. The nomination and a GA Review on this seem to be lost in the midst of Time, except what's on the talk page. (On closer review the "official" GA candidate and GA Review seem to be ON the talk page (only). A peer review, which started the process is at Wikipedia:Peer_review/Chambersburg,_Pennsylvania/archive1)

• Also Option (finance) - but this is a difficult article to keep in shape (spam, POV pushing) and the GA award by User:SammiHarris didn't follow the usual form. But check with User:Ronnotel if you want to consider this one. The article was (and maybe still is) GA quality.
• And the Tulip mania GA, as above

DYK - Peter Pronovost, See User Talk:Smallbones#DYK: Peter Pronovost

• St. Andrew's Anglican Church, Moscow, See User Talk:Smallbones#DYK
• Neel Kashkari - nomination only, so it probably shouldn't count, See User Talk:Smallbones#DYK for Neel Kashkari

Finally - the key "qualification" - see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Robert_Prechter#Smallbones_topic_banned and User Talk:Smallbones#Topic_ban_violation. BTW, even the arbitration committee is entitled to make a mistake every once in a while!

Yes, I would consider it an honor, if you - taking this record as a whole, warts and all - decided to give me the award.

Sincerely,

Smallbones (talk) 17:26, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh yeah, I happened to just see the draft of this in Smallbones' user space. I started the FAC page for Tulip mania, but this was very much a co-nomination. The option (finance) GA issue is interesting. I hadn't connected the dots about User:SamiHarris, the Mantanmoreland thing, and the options GA. Whatever was the case with Sami, I don't think there can be much doubt that this editor had pretty deep knowledge of financial topics. I'd see no reason this GA would be considered invalid. At any rate, Smallbones would definitely be eligible for his work getting Tulip mania to GA as well. --JayHenry (talk) 04:35, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Wonderful. Sorry to be a bit tardy--many things tugging on my sleeve yesterday and today. I think this would be the second, though. BTW this award was the reason the rest of the triple crowns were created. Durova^Charge! 22:16, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I see below what some of the demands are, so take your time if you want to. If I don't hear from you in a week, I'll just copy the box and put it on my user page. Smallbones (talk) 02:26, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Personality rights

Sorry about the tone of my comment, it wasn't intended to be a dig. I've commented on that subject on the IfD page so I won't repeat myself here.

About the image that was deleted on commons (Bride-one.jpg), I dug up a copy and I don't think it should have been deleted according to the commons personality rights policy. Two reasons - one, the fact that nobody seems astonished at the photography, and the number of people present, suggests to me that it was a space with no reasonable expectation of privacy. Second, and requiring much less crystal ball gazing, it's actually really hard to identify the people in that photo! The woman in the centre has her face entirely hidden by her hands, and only one of the onlookers even has their face in the frame. That onlooker doesn't have any other part of herself in the frame so she could even be cropped out entirely with no loss of information if you were still concerned about her publicity rights. I'm happy to make some obscuring changes if you think they're necessary for restoration, but my personal feeling is that the image doesn't violate anyone's privacy as it stands. What do you think? Orpheus (talk) 08:38, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome to put it up for review. If my decision was mistaken I'll withdraw my comments from the IfD. Durova^Charge! 09:10, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I'm not active on/familiar with commons - what's the best way to get it reviewed? Orpheus (talk) 17:28, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Commons:Commons:Undeletion requests. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 22:13, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Dispatch 2

No feedback at WT:FCDW; are you working on the Featured sounds article? Pls respond there so I have less to watch. If I have to keep herding so much on the Dispatches, I may just give up. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:31, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

I've taken a few notes in user space. Do you have a deadline for me? Give me one and I'll fit it. Best, Durova^Charge! 22:12, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Deadline? We have nothing in the pipeline, and we talked about the slot weeks ago. Is yesterday good? (Do I sound frustrated yet? :-)) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:14, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Eep, um--I thought I talked about a two week hiatus to catch up with prior commitments. Ack, when do we publish (really really a bad day for a surprise, but I'll do my best). And...hm...come to think of it, video FPs would be easier to write up, saving sounds for later (because really that was early notes). Durova^Charge! 22:19, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

We've been talking about it for two weeks already :-) I can't keep dragging people to the Dispatches and shepherding them through. If people don't want to do them, I'll just give up. I set up a page where anyone can contribute. All of the instructions are on the page. I don't own it: I'm frustrated at having to drag people there. If there is no interest, and I'm forcing people to write, it's time to hang up the venture. See WP:FCDW for instructions. Pick a date, write it if you're interested. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:25, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'm on it. Word count? Durova^Charge! 22:37, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Samples are at {{FCDW}}; we've had some very long ones, and some very short ones. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:43, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

Please make it easy on me :-) [7] If you're going for a deadline already past, can you put your temp file link on the Dispatch talk page, where others can see it and work on it? I am trying to get coordination through the Dispatch talk page, and you didn't give the Newsroom a link either. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:11, 29 October 2008 (UTC)

OK, User:Durova/Featured content dispatch/Video is on a backburner. If you decide you want to write a Dispatch, pls visit WT:FCDW and coordinate it there, once you have a finished product. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:07, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

interesting discussion?

FYI Slrubenstein | Talk 15:57, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Admin?

Regarding this, bravo!  :) A precursor to a try again here, some of us hope--and this coming from someone you once blocked!?  :) All the best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 23:33, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Aw, heehee. I was trying to keep quiet about that. Ty for noticing, and best wishes. Durova^Charge! 23:52, 30 October 2008 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. Congrats nonetheless. --A Nobody^{My talk} 00:01, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Happy Halloween!

File:Halloween Hush Puppies.jpg

Photograph of my Halloween-themed Hush Puppies plush basset hounds in my bedroom.

As Halloween is my favorite holiday, I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Halloween! Sincerely, --A Nobody^{My talk} 21:13, 31 October 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 17:43, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome! Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 19:28, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia announces launch of new Valued pictures project

The project goes live for nominations on 1 December 2008 at 0:00 UTC

This Wikipedia Valued pictures project sets out to identify and encourage users' efforts in providing valuable images of high encyclopedic value, and to build up a resource for editors from other Wikimedia projects seeking such educational images for use online. The project also provides recognition to contributors who have made an effort to contribute enyclopedic images of difficult subjects which are very hard or nigh on impossible to obtain. The project will run alongside the existing Wikipedia Featured pictures and Picture peer review projects.

Please visit Valued picture candidates to nominate an image, or to help review the nominations. Anyone with an account on Wikipedia is welcome to nominate images, and also to take part in the open review process.

The Wikipedia valued picture project has opened for nominations. Please feel free to nominate an image at WP:VPC today!

I'm looking forward to seeing you at the nominations page. I know that, without a doubt, you will somehow come up with an amazing variety of valuable historical and perfectly restored images. See ya. Elucidate ^{(parlez à moi)} Ici pour humor 17:35, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, although the link still defaults to the Village Pump... Durova^Charge! 17:43, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Should be fixed about now. Elucidate ^{(parlez à moi)} Ici pour humor 20:02, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

So when, or is it still if?

My offer remains open, and from what I am seeing you are both (still) more than qualified, have the respect of the current batch of editors active on the admin function pages, and also needing the tools that come with the sysop flag (needing to ask admins who are less experienced than you to do the housekeeping chores overlapping from the stuff you are doing on other projects must be... frustrating). I can only co-nom because I will be playing Devils advocate as regards to your "history" - which I will show to be irrelevant at worse (and a benefit IMO) - but I cannot believe that there is no-one who will not put your name forward. I can only surmise that you are not presently interested in pursuing the extra potential workload, and am concerned that you feel you do not wish the aggravation of the process rather than that following a successful candidature; although that does not seem to be the character I remember and see now. Anyhow, just reminding you that if you wish to serve the project with some extra tools my co-championing your request is still on offer. LessHeard vanU (talk) 01:21, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Is this about en:wiki sysop? If so, the question is not when or if, it's "do so now"!! Absolutely, no question - calm, sensible, experienced, analytical, knowledgeable, committed - did I miss any? Durova for admin - yaay! Franamax (talk) 02:04, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

The last two RFAs where I had any serious participation were Everyking and Cirt; two well-known editors and seasoned Wikipedians who basically had to devote a full week to the thing. Today I nominated a portrait of Louis XVI for featured picture and put up Jimmy Carter's Panama Canal Treaty speech for featured sound; there's an article I need to finish copyediting so it can go to FAC. I've also got some GA noms underway that need a bit of work. I'm one of two people running the new Wikisource 'Song of the day' main page section; Not the Wikipedia Weekly is migrating to Meta under the new name WikiVoices and needs attention to maintain a smooth transition. So you tell me: is there a net gain or a net loss to putting that work on the back burner in order to ask for a set of tools that I don't use very often on the projects where I have it? Durova^Charge! 02:15, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

(ec - I have butted in as I am replying directly to the comment above.)That would depend on the investment in time for such a request. If you were to answer every comment, discuss the discussion, and "join the dots" then, yes, I agree that the impact upon your current workload may not be a net benefit. If you were to find someone who would write you a comprehensive nomination, and I (and any others so willing) would co-nominate, and you concisely answered the three "optional" questions - seeing as you have a sysop record to point at - and addressed only the relevant other questions (as you are simply seeking consensus to access some extra tools) then it would only be a small diversion from your current responsibilities. The net gain is that you would be able to perform immediately those small janitor tasks to ensure the flow of work instead of finding if there is anybody out there a qualified and experienced (and the two do not always go hand in hand) to do it for you - which I suggest is another gain for the project. Finally, instead of redirecting the requests that come to you, you will be able to action and confirm rather than explain and point - in most instances the accumulative effect will very quickly be positive. (Of course, it doesn't have to be this month or this year, either.) LessHeard vanU (talk) 02:33, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

I came over here to let you know I replied to you on my talk page. I couldn't help but read the two above paragraphs. I took a quick peak at your history (I'm no a wikistalker!!) and I would like to offer my support as well if you do decide on RfA. Just please someone give me a heads up on my talk page!! Cheers! Digital^Ninja 02:29, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Well thank you very much. Thank you, all three of you. This is very flattering. Never say never, I suppose. But it's not in any immediate plans. Been planning to give the media restoration project an outpost on Commons, and we really need to draft a proposed guideline for image editing. There's no 'best practices' writeup for that yet, and one is needed. We've got over 1500 people who can field unblock requests, etc. already. It takes far less time to file the occasional AIV than I used to spend on requests for assistance. Durova^Charge! 02:43, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, here's another answer. Best, Durova^Charge! 08:35, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I'll take that as a definitely maybe then... ;~) LHvU (talk) 10:36, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

IRC

I had begun to revise my opinion of you, but your comments here (I'm pastin direct from ANI) have shocked me - so just in case I have misunderstood you, could you just clarify.

• If this is the kind of behaviour we're going to get in that channel, then I say thank the Lord for those willing to leak logs for helping keep that channel accountable to the community. (And no, I do not leak logs myself.) Heimstern Läufer (talk) 07:09, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
• The most sensible comment I have read here - and no he did not! Giano (talk) 10:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
• As someone who has boycotted IRC for years, and who's gotten heads up from time to time about being the target of nastiness, I can't quite agree. The first step ought to be to have a private word with the person who posts something that rude, or bring it to the chanops' attention. Log sharing should be a last resort. And for something of this nature--just an obscene potshot--there's hardly a need to defend oneself. It's the sort of thing mature adults normally handle discreetly or rise above. Durova^Charge! 09:40, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
• Are you seriously suggesting Durova that editors should turn a blind eye to the insults of the IRC #admin's ratpack? This time they picked on one well able to defend himself - what happens on the occasions when the editor is not? He is just driven off or walks off in disgust. Shame on you Durova for even thinking such a thing. I will always point out the many shortcoming of that Arbcom sanctioned sewer. Giano (talk) 10:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Giano (talk) 10:54, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, the chanops are the best place to go. They usually respond pretty well, and if for some reason they didn't it'd make a more persuasive case to come to ANI or some other venue afterward. Yet really, letting stuff like that go actually is what I've done. It says far more about the person who posted it than it does about you (or me or anybody who gets targeted in a cheap manner). Rising above such things isn't passivity; it's an active demonstration of who's the wiser person.

Maybe that's easier from the perspective of being able to join the channel, but refusing to. Years ago I used to own a motorcycle and it was much easier to sit in Los Angeles freeway traffic knowing I could weave between the cars and get out of there, but choosing not to. So yeah, if you're stuck in the SUV I see your point, and I didn't intend the statement in any demeaning manner. Best wishes. Durova^Charge! 19:18, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Well Durova, here are the chan ops [8] No wonder the arbcom refuse to address the problems of IRC - what a stinking farce this pace is. Giano (talk) 19:24, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

At the last IRC arbitration I made a workshop post that would have brought IRC within ArbCom's scope, and also offered a general amnesty for actions taken during the time when its status was unclear/in dispute. That would have made it a straightforward matter to come to ANI over gross incivility. Do you like that solution? And if so, do you see a way of getting it implemented? Durova^Charge! 19:31, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

It will never happen because IRC and Arbcom are one and the same thing. Giano (talk) 19:36, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Well, if you still find my comment offensive I'll gladly strike it through. Durova^Charge! 19:38, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

No leave it, it matters not. Come December we will all have the chance to express our views on Forrester and his cronies very adequatly. Just a pity it's not the whole crumbling heap up for re-election. Giano (talk) 19:41, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Louis-Maurice Boutet de Monvel

On 2 November, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Louis-Maurice Boutet de Monvel, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Tres bien Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:32, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Re Your comment

Do you think everyone who's posted spent 32 minutes watching the documentary? I doubt it. I reckon half the reason videos often get so few votes is that people don't want to spend the 30secs they usually go for watching them, and then try to evaluate that length against criteria that are more based around photographs to start with, much less the 32 minutes that this one is and try to evaluate that. And to be honest (and you'll hate this one too), that's another reason I struggle with seeing this as a valid FP - it's so big and long it's either unusable for many users (because of download issues) or beyond their realm of interest. As I said back in my original comment, people are going to have to be pretty committed to the topic already before they're ever going to look at or use this. You may think that's irrelevant as far as FPC is concerned, but I don't. I wonder if you couldn't extract a short 30s 'highlights' from it that would make it of more general use, resolve the thumbnail issue, make it more article and FPC friendly, and then link to the big one for those that really want to see the lot? --jjron (talk) 14:03, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

That's an interesting suggestion. Part of me says 'sure, sounds good!' Another part mutters 'The Last Supper' is too big. Could you just crop it down to the important parts, like Jesus and Judas?' I don't know; I'd better pour more coffee. Durova^Charge! 19:02, 2 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/"Au Clair de la Lune" illustration

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Au Clair de la Lune children's book 2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 01:51, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, nice pic it is too, made for a good piccy at DYK. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:15, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) Durova^Charge! 03:49, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Song articles

Dear Durova, I tried improving another one of the song articles you templated. Anyway, I hope that helps and is what you were looking for. All the best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 20:23, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you! Still a stub, but much better. Here's an example of what I'd really like to see more of.[9] All the best, Durova^Charge! 20:49, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

Happy to help! Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 20:51, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

It's so much better when these things are written like real articles. Which reminds me, I have a few GA drives to finish. :) Do you like Irving Berlin? Durova^Charge! 20:58, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

What makes you ask? --A Nobody^{My talk} 20:59, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

I've been working on his pre-1923 songs for Wikisource and WP. Durova^Charge! 21:05, 3 November 2008 (UTC)

So, are you asking for my help? If there is a specific article(s) you need help sourcing, let me know and I'll be glad to see what I can find. Please note though that I will be grading midterms in the coming week and discussing my dissertation, so my time and presence here may suddenly disappear for a time. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 01:09, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Would love a hand if you've got time. I've got a few on the verge of GA that just need a little help. First things first, of course. Let me know when you're available. Best, Durova^Charge! 01:26, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Just let me know the list; I keep off-wiki a reminder of the last song article I worked on so I know which one to go to next (for now, I am just trying to add at least one or two reliable sources to all them so they are at least solid stubs). Anyway, I am meeting with my advisor on Wednesday, so I suppose it depends how many revisions he has for me, but I can always take a break here and there. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 01:30, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Right now these ones are closest to being ready: Durova^Charge! 01:35, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

• I'm Just Wild About Harry
• That International Rag
• Oh! How I Hate to Get Up in the Morning

Okay, I'll add them to my userpage as a reminder for when/if I have some time for article work. Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 15:57, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

Okay, I did add some references to each of the article's leads (see [10], [11], and [12]). When I edit I like to have some subtle creativity. Can you spot the similarity in the references I chose?  :) Best, --A Nobody^{My talk} 16:23, 4 November 2008 (UTC)

I'm guessing that means you didn't spot it! Anyway, I managed to find three separate reliable sources (books) for all three separate articles all three of which had citable information on page 31 of the respective texts. Three books for three articles, all three of which with the relevant information on page 31! I thought someone might appreciate the little touch. Regards, --A Nobody^{My talk} 02:15, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kuban Kazak-Hillock65

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kuban Kazak-Hillock65/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Kuban Kazak-Hillock65/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tznkai (talk) 00:45, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Need Your Expertise...

Hi! I am looking for consensus on the image to be used for Barack Obama. I see your name on the FPC page all the time and hope you can weigh in on which photo you think is better by visiting Talk:Barack Obama#Consensus on Image. Obviously this is no FP candidate, but I'd like to get people with some experience in that realm to comment (composition, quality, etc). Spare a minute and help out? Thanks! ~ Wadester16 (talk) 16:49, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much; I'll leave that up to the people who actively edit the page. Either choice looks fine to me. Durova^Charge! 19:14, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Milhist Triple Crown revisited (2)

I know you're very busy but I would very much appreciate it if you could find time to comment at this here? To refresh your memory, we briefly talked about this in June and I mentioned it to you last month. Many thanks in advance, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 06:32, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Genghis Khan edition conquest of the wiki world triple crown

User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle/Nominations Gary King (talk) 18:03, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

RFC discussion of User:Privatemusings

A request for comments has been filed concerning the conduct of Privatemusings (talk · contribs). You are invited to comment on the discussion at Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Privatemusings. -- MBisanz ^talk 01:38, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

G'day D - and I gather we missed each other in IM earlier - more the need to be somewhere else than any disinclination on my part! (I'm well up for chatting as much as possible, wherever possible, as you know :-) - no doubt we'll catch up somewhere somehow soonish :-) best, Privatemusings (talk) 08:54, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

NowCommons: Image:Pierre Cauchon.jpg

Image:Pierre Cauchon.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:Image:Pierre Cauchon-Jeanne Darc manuscript.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[Image:Pierre Cauchon-Jeanne Darc manuscript.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 11:48, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Siege of Yorktown, Virginia 1862

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Yorktown artillery2.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 03:03, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Trumpetcallsa.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on November 11, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-11-11. (That's Remembrance Day, if you hadn't noticed.) howcheng {chat} 07:30, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

WT:MENTOR follow-up

Following up the RfC, I've started a thread at WT:MENTOR here. I've been perusuing the history of that page, and it is quite interesting. Maybe that page should be used more? It also seems to clearly layout what the difference is between voluntary and involuntary mentorship. It might also help if people link to that page more often (the RfArb clarification thread failed to link to WP:MENTOR). Carcharoth (talk) 13:23, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Podcast on controversial articles

Filll mentioned that you have been involved in the Israeli-Palestinian mediation. Therefore, I was wondering if you would be interested in coming on a podcast about controversial articles that Scartol and I are working on for our series of podcasts on improving content. If you are interested, please sign up here. Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 18:01, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Will you be running?

You would get my vote, at the very least :) --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:35, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Using photos from Architect of the Capitol okay?

Hi Durova. I see you at the featured picture candidate page all the time and I'd assume, based on your typical content, that you are familiar with copyright law with respect to images. I'm currently doing an overhaul of United States Capitol Visitor Center and want to use some of the excellent photos at the website of the Architect of the Capitol. I know that all construction update photos are taken by an employee of the AOC. I wouldn't use artistic renderings, only photographs. Do you think photos like these ([13], [14], [15]) would be in the public domain because they are taken by a federal government employee?

Any help you can offer would be appreciated! ~ Wadester16 (talk) 03:59, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

This is the statement about photographs that they publish on their website.[16] Suggest you contact their webmaster and request clarification about copyright status; they might be using photographs that were privately shot in part of their website. Unfortunately I haven't found this agency to be responsive to past queries on other matters. Durova^Charge! 05:17, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Good enough, thanks for your help! ~ Wadester16 (talk) 19:14, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Damien Hirst

Hey image use maestro, your learned opinion could be used. This version of the Damien Hirst article, under the "Critical response" section, has a photo of Tracy Emin that I find overwhelms the section. Now, I don't think many people would agree that I am for restrictive use of photos, but this one in particular stuck out like a sore thumb to me and distracted me from the text. It is one critic (out of many) who has simply commented on Hirst's influence in the art world. I and another editor don't find this meets the criteria for an image to be significantly relevant to an article's subject, but one other editor thinks it does. I find it a distraction, and out of place. Could you review the arguments at Talk:Damien_Hirst#Photo_of_Tracey_Emin and give an opinion? --David Shankbone 15:20, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Discussion of topic ban

Since you contributed to the ANI discussion that led to this, you may wish to contribute to the topic ban discussion here: Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard#Proposed_topic_ban:_User:Pcarbonn_from_Cold_fusion_and_related_articles. Regards, SHEFFIELDSTEEL^TALK 21:19, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Medcab

Hiya.. I opened the MedCab case on Woo Jang-choon. Here's hoping! [roux » x] 23:05, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi.. per this (which I have redacted due to its general incivility), could you swing by the medcab and expand on your view of what the dispute is? It would be very helpful. Thanks! [roux » x] 20:28, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

RFC

I accepted a private apology from Mathsci, although his comments about me were not private. Acceptance of an apology does not mean the events leading up to it did not happen. They did. I was repeatedly baited by Wiki editors with comments to which I could not respond directly without divulging my identity, which I do not wish to do. Slrubenstein did nothing to resolve anything concerning me.

Rationalization and self-justification are poor indicators of truth and justice. In all the discussion he has generated on this issue, there is no indication Slrubenstein can distinguish between right and wrong. In his mind, he is always right; in his mind, his every deviation from Wiki policy was justified. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 16:34, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Mervyn, in my book apologies are best given with the same level of publicness as the offense: private apology for a private offense, public for public. It may be difficult to obtain that sort of thing--and seldom useful for the aggrieved party to demand it. Sometimes, though, an independent third party gets better results. Obviously I can't guarantee anything, but would it be worth it to you if I tried? Durova^Charge! 22:43, 12 November 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for your concern. Mathsci is no longer the issue. I've accepted his apology. Slrubenstein is the only pending issue. He doesn't appear at all inclined to apologize for anything, as he doesn't appear to recognize he did anything inappropriate. If he did, things might be different. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 00:06, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

I'll discuss it with him. Durova^Charge! 00:18, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Please allow me to point out that it is not Charles Matthews who is "on trial" in the Slrubenstein RfC. Your latest Outside View posting in the case is an inappropriate attack on Charles Matthews which does not make ANY constructive contribution whatsoever, and has the appearance of a grudge match. Please withdraw that statement. It reflects more on you than on him. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 20:26, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

That is not an attack upon Charles, nor is it a grudge. If there is something that was poorly worded and may be construed in such a way, please explain. I would happily amend any unintentional phrasing which conveys that impression. I have no grievance with Charles and have merely been an uninvolved but concerned observer to the RFC and the cited arbitration case. But to outright withdraw the opinion? Arbitrators are not above scrutiny. The opinion is a conscientious decision, and although you may disagree please respect the underlying good faith. It does not vindicate all other parties; it fills in what had already been mentioned in passing by several people.

You raise a good point about venue. Historically, some conduct RFCs have included statements about the involved parties. It has not always been my opinion that they ought to. So here are the three options about the statement itself:

• An RFC on Charles Matthews. One had already been suggested on the talk page by another party. That would open the door to a lot more evidence along those lines though.
• An RFAR on Charles Matthews. Arguably, the relevant private correspondence would make that the natural option. Yet it would turn up the drama quotient considerably to initiate RFAR on a sitting arbitrator. I don't want to do that; I hope the concerns get resolved at the RFC level. Would it really be so difficult for Charles to strike out a few old posts, promise to leave clearer block notes in the future, and let bygones be bygones?
• Leave the statement where it is, since dialog with him at his user talk and at RFC talk has been fruitless.

You are an involved party in an unfortunate position so I value your input. Which of those three venues would you prefer? The present one seems like the best of the three. If the two of us agree on little else today, let's at least share the hope that neither of the others will ever be necessary. If you insist, though, I could take it to another venue. Durova^Charge! 21:52, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Please forgive me for noting it, but your post above, and the one on the RfC page, do not have the flavor of an "uninvolved but concerned observer." Much too harsh. But then, I was only trained at the doctoral level in methods of drawing inferences from observations of human behavior, and have only been doing that for 30 years professionally.

From the article on Mobbing: "In the book MOBBING: Emotional Abuse in the American Workplace, the authors claim that mobbing is typically found in work environments that have poorly organized production and/or working methods and incapable or inattentive management and that mobbing victims are usually 'exceptional individuals who demonstrated intelligence, competence, creativity, integrity, accomplishment and dedication.'" I have no history with Charles Matthew or anyone else in this matter, but some of the behavior I'm witnessing (not only your posts) have been remarkably consistent with that theme. It does not make me regret anything I've posted on my user page. Mervyn Emrys (talk) 02:06, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

A person whose aim was abuse would not have asked Orangemarlin to turn down the heat at the RFC talk page or called out the anon IP who was violating the sockpuppet policy. If the flavor of my prose is piquant, that is because graduate school training in writing is a good education in sauces. Assume good faith is site policy: this explanation should not have been necessary. Durova^Charge! 03:29, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

And yet, after asking someone else to "turn down the heat at the RfC talk page" you fan the flames with your Outside View posting on the RfC page itself. A curious inconsistency? Mervyn Emrys (talk) 16:13, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Vladimir Dmitrievich Nabokov, the father of the novelist, doesn't have the Wikipedia biography he deserves. The fellow was a moderate who believed in freely elected government and tried to create one during the Russian revolution. In 1922 he attended a political debate and an assassin appeared while he was on the stage, aiming a gun at Nabokov's opponent. Nabokov immediately sprung to his opponent's defense, wrestled the gunman to the floor, and died in the resulting struggle. To someone intent upon construing the worst, that too could take the shape of a curious inconsistency. Durova^Charge! 17:22, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Cryptic. Take some responsibility for your actions, Durova.

And have a nice day. :) Mervyn Emrys (talk) 19:35, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

All right, putting this plainly. The 'curious inconsistency' you noted is a flaw in your paradigm. Suppose principled opposition instead of emotional abuse, suppose reasoned criticism is distinct from mobbing and flaming, and it makes perfect sense that an ethical critic would intervene against sniping. Up to this point I responded to your comments in the good faith supposition that you were new to our site and unfamiliar with its culture in which negative conjecture is the explanation of last resort. Yet this is the second time you have used formulaic courtesies within a post that was overtly hostile. You have yet to respond to my query for your opinion about appropriate venue, so I will pose the question elsewhere. Unless you entertain the possibility that you are interacting with a rational and ethical person, this conversation has dead-ended. Durova^Charge! 20:35, 15 November 2008 (UTC)

Just a note, dear Durova, which I hope won't spoil your otherwise acute analysis. Nab's father was not shot by the gunman he wrestled with, Shabelsky-Bork, but by his henchman, Sergey Taboritsky, who shot the great man in the back as he pinned the other thug down. Best Regards as always, the always irascibly pedantic Nishidani (talk) 17:29, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Right, he was actually winning that wrestling match. But a second gunman appeared. In the resulting struggle seemed like a clean enough way to simplify that for a short summary. Best, Durova^Charge! 18:11, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXII (October 2008)

The October 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:47, 13 November 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cold fusion

An Arbitration case in which you commented has been opened, and is located here. Please add any evidence you may wish the Arbitrators to consider to the evidence sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cold fusion/Evidence. Please submit your evidence within one week, if possible. You may also contribute to the case on the workshop sub-page, Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Cold fusion/Workshop.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Tznkai (talk) 16:06, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

Templates n' things,

I hope you don't mind, feel free to revert me if you don't like my idea, and if you do, I'll gladly put up an explanation of use on the page.— Dædαlus ^Contribs /_Improve 12:56, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

A perhaps WP:GA-able article

I've come across this article, nominated for WP:GA a year ago, Juice Plus, and believe it could perhaps be brought up to meet the criteria. It was robbed!:) Are you up for a quick tinker with it before one of us resubmitting it for GA assessment? Sticky Parkin 19:15, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

POTD notification

POTD

Hi Durova,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture Image:Preservewildlifeb.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on November 20, 2008. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2008-11-20. howcheng {chat} 05:24, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Cailil is away so I thought maybe I'd ask you this. You know of my interest in fair blocking as I was unjustly blocked last year.

I saw an interesting thing on RFCU. The details are not important so you don't even need to look there. Essentially, someone has been blocked indefinitely after being accused of being a sock. Others on ANI, including long time users, question this. The reason for the accusation is that the user half-way defended a blocked user which, in some people's opinions, is automatic proof of sockpuppetry (which is what happened to me).

The blocked user claims to be in one city and the other user in another faraway city. The simple thing to do would be to have the checkuser confirm that the city claims are accurate (or not true). Instead, the checkuser said that a checkuser is not needed because the users are already blocked. That would be similar to someone blocking you as a sock of Jimbo Wales and then refusing to run a checkuser because you are already blocked.

I'm not so interested in this matter to post comments on the relevant pages (RFCU or ANI) but I thought I'd get your opinion on the matter since Cailil is away. This is just for my own education about wikipolicy. Chergles (talk) 16:41, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the query but I'm overcommitted right now. Looks like I'll need to sub for the fellow who set up the ArbCom candidate interviews, and am doing content on other projects. Apologies for not having more time. Best wishes, Durova^Charge! 18:15, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Mentee

You mentee seems to enjoy poking me with a stick. He just made this edit. Please note this article is currently being featured on the main page as a DYK. Can you do something about this? Thanks. Tiamut^talk 19:44, 18 November 2008 (UTC)

Durova, Jaakobou is just plain wikihounding me, despite the recommendations of other editors at WP:AE for him to avoid interactions with me. He has posted to my talk page twice, and if you check his contribs, he continues to focus his editing primarily around Q-D-S. As his mentor, could you should do something? Or should I take this WP:AE again? Tiamut^talk 15:57, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Hi, I've had a chat with him. Suggested he take the hint about his level of welcome at your user talk. Shared a long story with him about the value of keeping polite distance. He agrees, and has other things to keep him busy. He was concerned about the direction that thread was going. Now I don't have an opinion about the validity of his concern, yet there's another story I'd like to share with you.

During my earliest days as an editor ago I sought mediation for a content dispute. Basically, a fellow was trying to use his own family tree as a source for an article. He published that family tree on another website. He didn't regard that as self-published since another relative of his had written the family tree. Well, a second editor and I had doubts about that. But we read the thing anyway. I looked at the older generations and noted gaps in the chronology. The second editor looked at the newest generations and came to my user talk to post a concern about something he saw. The second editor didn't mean it as a personal insult, but the fellow with the family tree did take it personally. I hadn't commented on that observation. Soon afterward I courtesy blanked the thread. Two and a half years later that courtesy blanking turned out to have been a very wise decision. You see, the fellow with the family tree ended up getting indefinitely blocked. Afterward he claimed I had harassed his daughter--a very serious accusation. Afterward it helped me enormously when neutral parties looked into that claim, that I had acted as I did. The actual thread had hardly been offensive at all, and everyone who looked into it agreed that my actions had been appropriate. That's an extreme example; I have no reason to think Jaakobou would lodge an outrageous claim of that magnitude against you. It's just--well--one of the choices I made that turned out to have been a good one. The courtesy cost nothing and in the long run it bought peace of mind. Durova^Charge! 18:24, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

That's an interesting story Durova, and I do understand your point, which I will consider. What I don't understand, however, is how it is that Jaakobou has been allowed to continue wikihounding me at my talk page and the Q-D-S page for three days now, despite the recommendations of multiple editors that he keep his distance. I don't understand how that results in his getting to "have a chat with you" about it, instead of something more serious. He basically ignored what people said at WP:AE completely.

You, as his mentor, encouraged those with problems with his editing to contact you. But your solution is always simply to chat with him off wiki and then convey to others how he understands what you are telling him. But then the problem repeats itself again and again and again. I really do hope that your eternal optimism is not misplaced; sadly however, based on my experiences with Jaakobou over the last year, I have to say I'm a lot more cynical than you are. Regards, Tiamut^talk 18:36, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

It's been about a day and a half since I read the AE thread. I'll catch up on it now. Durova^Charge! 18:49, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

(outdent) Not much more has been posted over at AE. There have been other occasions when I stepped down from the mentorship role. Last month, along with Privatemusings's two other formal mentors, I resigned from that undertaking. After a conduct RFC opened on him I did give a statement there. A few months earlier, when it turned out that someone else I had mentored informally had compromised two admin accounts, I stepped forward at the resulting noticeboard discussion.

Ideally at Wikipedia we resolve problems through persuasion, and when you come to a mentor what you usually get is mentoring. You can rest assured that if Jaakobou becomes unresponsive to mentorship or compromises administrator accounts (or something else on that scale), I'll step forward in other ways. If administrative consensus at AE agreed that his actions needed remedy I wouldn't stand in the way. Overall--although there have certainly been bumps along the path--Jaakobou appears to be doing much better than he was a year ago. His editing interests have broadened. He's creating more quality content. He's citing sources politely and using dispute resolution instead of losing his patience. Now it's possible that my lack of deep familiarity with the dispute colors that perception; I apologize for the shortcoming if it does.

What I can't do is make either of you like each other. There are two ways to deal with that: one is to maintain as much polite distance as possible, the other is to foster collaboration someplace where you agree. Each route has difficulties. With the former, you both edit the same contentious topic--inevitably some contact will occur. With the latter, even finding agreement may be difficult--cuisine comes to mind and I'm not sure quite why. What I intend to discourage is a third path where people poke at each other until a lot of drama results. If you know of a fourth path--a constructive one--I'm all ears. Durova^Charge! 19:46, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Tact? I'd say 95% of the edits I'm tempted to make, I choose not to make. Most of the language in I/P articles worries me. I have to force myself to read them. I'd be in Bedlam were I to take this on as a mission to get everything fixed as I see it. We are not obliged to jump in at everything that may worry us personally. Learning to withhold one's hand unless one is assured that there is real value and point to editing this, or there, makes for good editorial practice, even when it is invisible. I've often thought - I must intervene - this is poor, and then chosen not to because I'm not prepared for it - only to find oput after a day or two that someone else has remarked the same thing and entered with more assurance. In the Q-D-S, the issue that worried Jaakobou was piddling, minuscule, something 99% of those reading the article would note. There was too, a certain visible joy in its editor in being in a zone free of contention working on pure philology. It's this kind of self-restraint and tact one asks for.

One can, of course, as every philologist knows, detect bias even there, but you have to be a sharp philologist. Martin Bernal, cited on the Q-D-S page, is a case in point. Professor of Chinese, he discovered his Jewish roots late (fascinating family), and turned to ancient semitic languages, whose treatment and culture had been, for racist reasons, hermetically sealed off from 'classical Greece'. Much of his critical approach is pure politics though, and his philology wasn't up to snuff. Less politics, and more work on semitic and comparative philology and his case might have been stronger. I.e., at a glance it should have been noted that Tiamut was giving wiki a good page on semitic roots, that there was nothing contentious in its content, nothing to offend any sensibility, and, oh yes, under the microscope the disambiguation does lead one to a militant, but . . is that a thing to make a huge fuss of, certainly given our past relations? No, the fate of Israel does not hang on a hatnote, etc. RegardsNishidani (talk) 21:21, 19 November 2008 (UTC)

Let's put the matter like this: when the CAMERA fiasco occurred I spoke up against it. That sort of nonsense is unacceptable no matter what POV is at stake. If Jaakobou had been mixed up in that it would have been the end of the mentorship. But he wasn't, thank goodness. Semitic philology? Beyond my depth. Jaakobou may know something and, as another commenter mentioned at AE, he's been active at DYK. DYK is one of the areas where I've encouraged him to spend more time, generally speaking, although he and I weren't in communication on that particular occasion. I've often encouraged him to assume the best of the editors he's been in conflict with wherever there were reasonable grounds to do so. That's hard in an area where good faith (both onsite and offsite) has been worn so thin. Durova^Charge! 21:48, 19 November 2008 (UTC)